Lalit Kumar vs ITO Gurugram

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Shri Lalit Kumar, an agriculturist, did not file his return for Assessment Year 2015-16. Based on information from the department's insight portal regarding cash deposits in his bank account, a notice under section 148 was issued to him on 05.04.2022. The assessment was completed ex-parte at an income of Rs. 68,22,990/- due to unexplained cash deposits added under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide order dated 27.03.2024. Aggrieved by this, the assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi, which was also dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the notice under section 148 issued to the assessee on 05.04.2022 for A.Y. 2015-16 is time-barred.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Diamond Tradecom Private Limited v/s. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 12(2)(1)

• Shri Bantupalli Varaprasad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Raichur

  Bangalore benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Sanam Jignesh Jain Vs. ITO, Ward-19(3)(1)

• Swami Vivekanand College vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4)

  Mumbai benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• ITA No. 6370/DEL/2025; Assessment Year: 2018-19

• Shri Biluve Dharme Prasanna Vs. The Income Tax Officer

  SMC-‘C’ Bench : Bangalore benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed