Jagdish Chandra Dhariwal vs. ACIT

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee electronically filed his return of income on 30/10/2017 declaring income at Rs.14,84,830/-. The case was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 accepting the return income. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) has been initiated. The AO made addition of Rs.7,07,500/- u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash deposit in the bank account during the demonetization period and also made an addition of Rs.5,96,107/- as unexplained money u/s 69 of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide order dated 09/01/2024 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee preferred the present appeal before the ITAT on the grounds mentioned above aggrieved by confirmation of the addition of Rs.13,03,607/- in respect of cash deposit in bank account.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A)NFAC has grossly erred in violating the principal of faceless appeal as announced for justice of honest taxpayers and the functioning of faceless processing's in honesty and judicially manner and to avoid litigation as created unnecessary by AO. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A), NFAC grossly erred in not considering the submission of assessee in right perspective and judicious manner. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A), NFAC grossly erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 1303826/- in respect of cash deposit in bank account. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A), NFAC grossly erred in upholding the findings recorded by Ld. AO that source of cash deposit in bank account of undisclosed income. AO that source of cash deposit in bank account out of undisclosed income. 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A), NFAC grossly erred in upholding the provision of sec 69A of the Act particularly the source of cash deposit is duly recorded in books of accounts. 6. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A), NFAC grossly erred in deciding the appeal in very casual & preserve manner without application of mind. 7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld CIT(A), NFAC grossly erred in recording arbitrary allegations & observations which are contrary to material record and also against the provision of law. 8. That the petitioner may kindly be permitted to raise any additional or alternative grounds at or before the time of hearing. 9. The petitioner prays for justice & relief.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Smt. Najmunnisha Alibhai Patel Vs. Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench

• Seema Devi Jain Vs. ACIT

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Pinkeshkumar Melapchand Shah Vs. The ITO, Ward-2(2)(4) Ahmedabad

  Ahmedabad bench

• Talshibhai Vashrambhai Vithani vs. The ITO, Ward – 2(3)(6), Surat

  Surat bench

• Bachan Lal vs. ITO

  Jodhpur bench

• Durga Trading Co. Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ghaziabad

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