ITA No. 1229/MUM/2024

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The Assessee, Bindu Pradeep Nambiar, did not file a return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-2013. However, the Income Tax Department had information that the Assessee had undertaken transactions aggregating to INR 78,95,010/- in respect of which payments were made through credit card. Therefore, reassessment proceedings were initiated under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee did not file any return of income in response to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act. A show-cause notice was issued to the Assessee, dated 08/12/2019, in response to which the Assessee filed details of sale and purchase of properties along with a copy of the agreement and computation of capital gain. However, the Assessee failed to furnish any details regarding payment of credit card bills aggregating to INR 5,30,132/- and receipt of INR 3,33,332/-. The Assessing Officer noted that as per Form 26AS, which was verified from TRACES, the Assessee had received INR 83,333/- from Alimia India Loyalty Management Private Limited. Therefore, the Assessing Officer assessed the total income of the Assessee for the Assessment Year 2012-13 at INR 6,13,470/- after making addition of INR 5,30,132/- in respect of credit card expenses and addition of INR 83,333/- in respect of professional receipt. The Assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the Assessment Order, dated 26/12/2019. The Assessee contended that the credit card expenses were per…

Legal Issues

• 1. The Income Tax Officer-22(1)(3), Mumbai erred in adding Rs.5,30,132/- to the income of the Assessee u/s. 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 treating the same as an unexplained income.
• 2. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance made by the AO in respect of payment of credit card expenditure of Rs.5,30,132/-
• 3. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing an appellate order dated 10-01-20 whereas the remand proceedings were pending before the AO wherein the AO has issued notice dated 09-01-2024 to Assessee to submit the relevant details and explanation on or before 19-01-2024.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Manackraj Kamaraj VS ITO NCW 11(2) Chennai

• Dhairya Jyotish Dandwala vs The ITO, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

  Ahmedabad bench

• ITO VS ANNAMALAI

• Shri Pavuluri Sylendra vs. Income Tax Officer

  Hyderabad bench

• Ayyanna Patrudu Geddam vs. Income Tax Officer

  Hyderabad bench

• ACIT vs Ajanta Raaj Proteins Ltd.

  Delhi 'A' Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed