Harshish Singh Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-28(8), New Delhi

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The appellant assessee, Harshish Singh, derived income from the sale and purchase of diamonds and jewellery during the Assessment Year 2017-18. He filed his Return of Income on 17.11.2017 declaring a total income of Rs.12,04,630/- under section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case was selected for scrutiny through Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (CASS), revealing that the appellant had made cash deposits in his bank account during the demonetisation period. The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order on 21.12.2019, determining the assessed income at Rs.87,98,580/- as against the returned income, making additions under section 68 for unexplained cash deposits, unsecured loans, and advances from sundry creditors and customers. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed these additions.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 68 for unexplained cash deposits, unsecured loans, and advances are justified.
• 2. Whether the assessee should be assessed under section 115BBE.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Harish Chander Sehgal vs ITO

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Capital City Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), New Delhi

• Sh. Hukum Singh Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ghaziabad

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2011-12Partly Allowed

• ITO, Delhi vs. Shann Jewellers

  Delhi Bench ‘A’ benchAY 2017-18Dismissed

• DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata vs. Arthur Turnkey Projects Ltd.

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• ACIT vs Manoj Kumar Goyal