RAHUL JAIN VS. ITO, WARD 59(8), NEW DELHI

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Rahul Jain, an individual, e-filed his return of income on 31.7.2017 declaring a total income of Rs. 4,95,970/-. His case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. During the demonetization period, the assessee deposited cash of Rs. 26,47,000/- in his bank accounts. The Assessing Officer (AO) passed an assessment order on 21.12.2019, making an addition of Rs. 26,47,000/- as unexplained money under section 69A. In appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) upheld the action of the AO in the absence of a plausible explanation and supporting documentary evidence to justify the source of cash deposits, and dismissed the assessee's appeal. Against this action, the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order passed by the ld. First Appellate Authority is arbitrary, injudicious, and bad at law.
• 2. Whether the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is bad at law and against natural justice for not providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
• 3. Whether Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 26,47,000/- under section 69A of the Act made by the AO on account of cash deposits.
• 4. Whether Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the orders of the AO without considering all relevant documents provided by the assessee.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Pinkeshkumar Melapchand Shah Vs. The ITO, Ward-2(2)(4) Ahmedabad

  Ahmedabad bench

• Gargi Manchanda vs. Income Tax Officer

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• JASMEET SINGH WALIA VS. ITO, WARD 58(8), NEW DELHI

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Shri Narender Singh Vs The I.T.O

  Delhi 'G' Bench benchAY 2012-13Partly Allowed

• PRAHLAD SINGH, VS. PCIT, ROHTAK

  DELHI BENCH ‘A’ NEW DELHI benchAY 2020-21Allowed

• Sanjay vs. ITO, Ward-2

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed