Laxman Suryabhan Katwate Vs. ITO, Latur

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Laxman Suryabhan Katwate, did not file his return of income for the assessment years 2017-18 and 2016-17. The Income Tax Department had information that the assessee made cash deposits amounting to Rs.63,82,710/- and Rs.78,61,180/- respectively in his bank account. The assessee was issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and subsequently filed his return declaring a total income of Rs.5,54,970/- for 2017-18 and an unspecified amount for 2016-17. The Assessing Officer added Rs.63,82,710/- and Rs.78,61,180/- to the assessee's income under section 69A of the Act, as the assessee could not provide satisfactory explanations for the cash deposits. The order was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the First Appellate Authority, leading to the assessee's appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is justified.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Mukesh Jain vs. The ITO

  Jodhpur bench

• Sh. Manoj Kumar Verma, Prop. MD Jewellers Vs. NFAC

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Manmohan Pravinchandra Madani vs. Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench

• Mayank Jain Vs Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Meerut

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Narendra Mohanlal Shah Vs. ITO Ward 42(1)(3), Range 431, Ward 42(1)(3), Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai-400051

• Divyarajsinh Vijaysinh Zala v. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)(1)

  Rajkot bench