ITA 2223/HYD/2025

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, RACHAPALLEM BHANUPRIYA, a salaried employee of M/s. Tata Consultancy Services, filed her income return on 27.07.2017. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.24,61,000/- under section 69A of the Income Tax Act on account of cash deposit during the demonetization period. The assessee challenged this addition before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) but the appeal was dismissed due to non-prosecution. The assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal, citing a delay of 286 days due to the ill-health of her Chartered Accountant, who was unable to attend to the matter.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is erroneous and bad in law.
• 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made by the Assessing Officer.
• 3. Whether the CIT(A) erred in demanding Rs.25,52,444/- for the AY 2017-18.
• 4. Whether the assessee can be given an opportunity to present her case before the CIT(A).
• 5. Whether the provisions of section 115BBE are applicable for the assessment year under consideration.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Deepti Chauhan vs. Income Tax Officer

  Delhi bench

• Tanjore Chandrakantam Balakrishnan Ravi Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Trichy

• Smt. Murugarathinasamy Sangeetha v. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Erode

  Chennai bench

• Binod Kumar Agarwal vs. DCIT, Central Circle-3(2), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2013-14Partly Allowed

• Shreya Dey Sarkar Vs. I.T.O., Ward-2(4), Raiganj

  Kolkata ‘D’ Bench benchAY 2014-15Partly Allowed

• Vakhithasafanna Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-15(1), Chennai