Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Padma Minnakuri, filed her income return for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on 07.10.2017, admitting a total income of Rs.15,34,040/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS, and statutory notices were issued under sections 142(1) and 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.42,67,000/- under section 69A of the Act. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), but it was dismissed due to non-compliance. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, raising several grounds for appeal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The learned CIT (Appeals) is erred in facts and law while passing the order.
• 2. The Learned CIT(Appeals) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.42,67,000/- representing the cash deposits made into the Bank account held by the appellant as unexplained money u/s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the I.T.Act.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Shivam Agarwal Vs. Income Tax Officer

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Zeliant Corp vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 36(1), Delhi

  Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Sartaj Ahmad Sofi, Latroo Aishmuqam, Anantnag (J&K) Vs The ITO, Ward, Anantnag

  Amritsar bench

• Sikha Datta vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer

  SMC Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Income Tax Officer, Ward-29(7), New Delhi-110002 Vs Praveen Chaudhary

  Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Dismissed

• Mukesh Kumar vs. ITO, Sonipat, Haryana

  Delhi Bench 'E', New Delhi benchAY 2012-13, 2014-15, 2013-14Allowed