Sartaj Ahmad Sofi, Latroo Aishmuqam, Anantnag (J&K) Vs The ITO, Ward, Anantnag

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The appeal is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, dated 23.10.2024, for assessment year 2017-18. The counsel for the assessee stated that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding the additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained money from undisclosed sources by applying the provisions of section 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act on the basis of presumptions while as the same represents the Sales made during the year under consideration. It was further submitted that no reasonable opportunity was accorded to the assessee to represent the appeal and argue the appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Therefore, it was requested that a fair opportunity be granted to effectively address the issues on merit and to submit necessary explanations and documentary evidence in support of the appeal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the additions made by the Assessing Officer.
• 2. Whether the assessee was accorded a reasonable opportunity to represent the appeal and argue the appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• M.D. Gupta Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ghaziabad

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2020-21Allowed

• Smt. Najmunnisha Alibhai Patel Vs. Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench

• T.K.Elevators India Private Limited (Formerly ThyssenKrupp Elevator (India) Pvt. Ltd.) vs. DCIT

  Delhi Bench ‘H’ benchAY 2010-11Allowed

• Crystal Vincom Private Limited

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2012-2013Partly Allowed

• Subhash Gupta vs. ITO, Ward 1 (4)

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• Balaram Nama Gaikwad vs IIO, Ward – 3(1), Kalyan

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2014-15, 2016-17Allowed