Harish Gupta vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Harish Gupta, filed his income tax return after the due date, which was treated as invalid by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO had information that the assessee deposited a large sum of cash during the demonetization period and other cash deposits in the previous year. Since the assessee did not file the return on time, the AO completed the assessment under section 144 of the Income Tax Act. The AO treated the cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A and added the entire amount to the assessee's income. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)), who reduced the addition by applying an 8% profit rate on the deposits. The assessee further appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the 8% profit rate was too high.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the profit rate of 8% applied by the CIT(A) on the cash deposits is reasonable.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Inderjeet Kaur Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-71(3), New Delhi

• M/s. Midnapur Timber Traders Vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi

  Kolkata ‘C’ Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2022-23Allowed

• Amar Kumar Agarwal vs DCIT, CC 4(3)

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-18 to 2021-22Partly Allowed

• Mohammad Naushad Vs ITO Ward-32(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata benchAY 2016-2017Allowed

• Shernickraj Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai

• Extension Systems Foundation International vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)

  Mumbai Bench 'E', Mumbai benchAY N.A.Allowed