Kumud Lahu Phadke vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Kumud Lahu Phadke, did not file the return of income for the Assessment Year 2013-14. A notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 04.03.2020. Due to the lack of compliance and failure to respond to the show cause notice, the Assessing Officer added Rs.51,30,000/- to the income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act for unexplained cash deposits/time deposits in the bank account. The assessee challenged this order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who decided the appeal ex-parte for non-compliance of notice(s) of hearing and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee appealed against this order to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Assessing Officer erred in confirming the order passed by the AO-ITO Ward-2, Panvel without verifying the correctness of information?
• 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the AO without verifying proper service of notice?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Dilip Kumar Show vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-30(6), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-2018Allowed

• M/s. Starburst Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-14(2), Kolkata

  Kolkata ‘C’ Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Shaheen Service Station v. ITO

  Amritsar bench

• Ganges Tieup Pvt. ltd. vs. ITO Ward 9(1)

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Vivek Mann Vs. ITO Ward-1

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2015-16Partly Allowed

• Ghanshyam Lalwani vs. ITO Ward -43(4), Kolkata

  Kolkata bench