Rahul Sudam Bankar vs. ITO, Ward-10(1), Akurdi, Pune

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The appellant, an individual agriculturist, filed an income return for the assessment year 2017-18 on 25.10.2018, declaring a total income of Rs.10,482/-. However, the return was not valid. Based on information from the Audit Information Management System (AIMS), the appellant made cash deposits of Rs.11,56,000/- during the demonetization period with HDFC Bank, Narayangaon. A notice under section 148 was issued to the appellant on 31.03.2021, and notices under section 142(1) were issued asking for an explanation regarding the source of the cash deposit. The appellant did not comply with these notices. Consequently, the Assessing Officer made a best judgment assessment under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Act, bringing the cash deposits of Rs.11,56,000/- into tax as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without adjudicating the issue on merits?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Ramdas Vishnu Markute Vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Pune

  Pune bench

• Ashok Ramchandra Panse vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Pune

  Pune bench

• Rahul Nandkumar Shelar vs. ITO

  Pune bench

• Anoop Gopikishan Jaju vs. ITO

  Pune bench

• PERIYA AGOUNDER RAMASAMY v. ITO Ward-1(6), SALEM

• Ajay Kumar Agarwal vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 4(3)(4), Hathras

  Agra bench