M/s Hotel Soniya Vs ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Succinctly stated facts of the cases are that, the assessee is a partnership firm carrying on veg-restaurant business on which a survey action u/s 133A of the Act on 06/10/2017 was carried out. During the survey on the basis of documents impounded a statement was recorded u/s 131A of the Act whereby the assessee declared certain income. The assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 19/03/2018 declaring NIL income. The return was subjected to scrutiny wherein the assessee was called upon to explain as to why the income declared in survey proceedings should not be added to total income. When notices issued u/s 143(2), 142(1) of the Act remained un-responded, the Ld. AO after putting assessee to show cause notice culminated the proceedings to the best of judgement by treating the amount of ₹35,00,00/- as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act which represented the portion of unexplained expenditure incurred by the assessee on construction of its hotel building and framed the assessment accordingly u/s 144 of the Act.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Ex-parte dismissal of first appeal

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Fun N Food Restaurant v/s ACIT, Central Circle-3

  Mumbai bench

• DCIT vs. Sujit Arya

  D Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2014-15Dismissed

• Madan Gangadhar Bidarkar vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1, Aurangabad

  Pune bench

• Window Technologies Private Limited vs PCIT (Central)-2, Kolkata

  Kolkata bench

• Pradipta Kumar Guha Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• ITO Ward 30(5) Vs. Raghav Goel

  C Bench, Delhi benchAY 2017-18Allowed