Shiv Kumar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward (4), Rohtak, Haryana

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Shiv Kumar, the appellant, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to pay advanced tax as per section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee claimed that the gross total income was below the threshold limit, hence no advance tax was liable. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.10,30,000/- on account of cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee submitted that they would be able to substantiate the source of cash deposits if given an opportunity. The respondent defended the order, stating that the assessee did not comply with the mandatory conditions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the assessee was liable to pay advance tax?
• 2. Whether the addition made by the Assessing Officer was justified?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Lakhmi Chand Khushiramani vs. Income Tax Officer

  Agra bench

• People Tree Chits Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 5(2)(1)

  C'' Bench: Bangalore benchAY 2018-19Partly Allowed

• Dharambir Singh vs. ACIT

  Delhi Bench ‘B’ benchAY 2013-14Partly Allowed

• Hariom Enterprises vs. ITO

  Delhi bench

• Vikash Mimani vs. ITO, Ward – 3(1), Gangtok

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2016-2017 & 2017-2018Allowed

• Sanjeev Kumar Jindal Vs. ITO

  Delhi bench