Indu Vimal Jha vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Samastipur

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Indu Vimal Jha, an appellant, has appealed against the demand of Rs. 2,10,78,543/- arising out of an order under section 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 24.03.2023. The appellant, represented by Narendra Kumar, Adv., argued that he was a person of meagre means and was unable to pay the demand. The appellant claimed that he was working as a Customer Service Point (outsourcing agent of bank for banking transactions) of the State Bank of India and that his bank account was used for transactions of other persons. The appellant also stated that he was in a relatively remote location and due to ignorance of law, he could not present the full gamut of facts before the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi. The appellant requested a stay on recovery till disposal of the appeal or alternatively, the matter to be remanded back to the Assessing Officer/CIT(A) for presenting his case.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Stay of demand amounting to Rs. 2,10,78,543/-

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Narayanagr Palanisamy vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-4(1), Coimbatore

  Chennai bench

• Shri Durairaj Velumani vs The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward 2(2), Chennai

• Income Tax Officer vs. Prakash Chandra Saha

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-19Dismissed

• Income Tax Officer vs. Amit Singla

  G Bench, Delhi benchAY 2018-19Dismissed

• Rattan Jodharam Harchwani v/s. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(2)

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• Agarwal Maheswari & CO vs ITO Ward-22(2), Kolkata

  Kolkata benchAY 2020-21Partly Allowed