Seema Pappu Yadav vs Income-tax Officer
Parties Involved
Facts Summary
The assessee, Seema Pappu Yadav, filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which upheld the order of the Income-tax Officer, Ward 31(3)(3), Mumbai. The Income-tax Officer had reopened the case under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and added Rs.52 lakhs as the purchase price of a property and Rs.14,96,900/- as a cash deposit in the bank account to the assessee's total income, as the source of these amounts was not explained. The assessee failed to comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer and her appeal before the NFAC was dismissed for non-prosecution. During the appellate proceedings before the Tribunal, the Assessing Officer submitted documents to explain the source of investment, which had not been filed previously. Both parties agreed to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.…
Decision in favour of
Assessee
Legal Issues
- 1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
- 2. Whether the case should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Judgment Outcome
Decided in favour of Assessee.
Similar Judgements
ITA No. 3354/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05
Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi benchAY 2004-05AllowedJamshed Alam Vs DCIT, Circle-32, Kolkata
Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-2019Partly AllowedArunkumar Jayantilal Muchhla vs DCIT
Mumbai Bench benchAY 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13AllowedBOSE CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD. Vs. ACIT
DELHI BENCH benchAY 2007-08 & 2008-09AllowedM/s Naveen Timber Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT
Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi benchAY 2016-17AllowedSeema Pritam Sharma vs. ITO
Mumbai Bench benchAY 2022-23Allowed