Seema Devi Jain Vs. ACIT

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The case involves Seema Devi Jain, who filed her return of income declaring income of Rs. 1,93,75,760/-. The case was selected for ‘complete scrutiny’ through CASS on the issues of ‘Sales turnover/receipts, cash deposit during demonetization period, low income from other sources as compared to large value fixed deposits and receipt of large foreign remittance’. The Assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by making an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- u/s 69A r.w.Section 115BBE on the ground that the Assessee could not provide proper justification for the source of cash deposited during the demonetization period. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 16/12/2019, the Assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee vide order dated 29/07/2024. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 29/07/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. Ten lakh u/s 69A of the Act on account of cash deposited during demonetization period.
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in confirming the demand of Rs. One lakh fifty thousand on account of surcharge @ 25% of tax and by charging education cess etc.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Mosarrat Perween vs ITO, Ward-61(4), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Suresh Kumar Gupta Vs. ACIT

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• Income Tax Officer, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110002 Vs Mishka Exim limited, Flat No.-102, Plot no-10, First Floor, Chetan Complex, Central Market, Surajmal Vihar, Delhi 110092, PAN-AAJCM3435F

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Dismissed

• Dhairya Jyotish Dandwala vs The ITO, Ward-5(2)(2), Ahmedabad

  Ahmedabad bench

• Jayanta Fanzen Lighting Industries Private Limited Vs. ACIT, Circle 10(1)

  Kolkata benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Manmohan Pravinchandra Madani vs. Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench