Pawan Kumar Vs. ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

This appeal was filed by the assessee, Pawan Kumar, against the order dated 31.01.2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which affirmed the order dated 16.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The AO had made an addition of Rs 17,06,65,030/- under section 69A due to unexplained cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee did not respond to the statutory notices before the AO. The assessee then approached the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) claiming he was merely a driver and that his employers had opened a bank account in his name without his knowledge. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition, noting that the requested remand report was not submitted. The assessee’s counsel argued that the CIT(A) should have waited for the remand report.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Addition of Rs 17,06,65,030/- by the AO and its affirmation by the CIT(A).

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Saroj Gupta (legal representative of Shri Pawan Kumar Gupta) Vs DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21Allowed

• Ramchand Through Legal Heir vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2011-12Allowed

• ITO, WARD 19(1) vs. ORIENTAL STITCH PVT. LTD.

  Delhi Bench ‘E’ : New Delhi benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• M.S. Stock Investment P. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(1), Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘A’ benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• INCOME TAX OFFICER VS. VISHAP BAJAJ

  Delhi Bench ‘A’ benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Ashish Bhalwar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Amroha, Uttar Pradesh

  Delhi Bench 'A', Delhi benchAY 2017-18Allowed