Sneha Siddham vs ACIT

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee had filed her return of income, declaring income of INR 12,03,730/- on 25.07.2014. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment was framed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) vide assessment order dated 03.11.2016. The Assessing Officer (“AO”) noted that the assessee had purchased a Toyota Innova Car for INR 12,36,033/- on 14.04.2013. Since there was no explanation on behalf of the assessee, the AO made addition of INR 12,31,000/-. Further, the AO also made addition of INR 92,658/- being interest income. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A), who, after considering the submissions, sustained the addition and dismissed the appeal of the assessee by applying the decision of Tribunal rendered in the case of Multi Plan. Aggrieved against the order of Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the impugned orders in a perfunctory manner?
• 2. Whether the order of the Ld. Assessing Officer is maintainable in law and on facts?
• 3. Whether the Ld. Assessing Officer and the CIT (Appeals) has passed the impugned orders without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Kishan Kumar Gupta vs ITO

  Delhi 'B' Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• M/s. Goodwill Corporation vs. ITO, Ward–17(3)(1)

  Mumbai bench

• Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax-8(2)(1) vs. MITC Metals Private Limited

  Mumbai bench

• Samast Hanuman Bhakt Gau Sewa Dham Trust vs. Income Tax Officer

  Delhi Bench ‘B’ benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• Aromatrix Flora (P) Ltd. vs ACIT, Circle-1(1)

  Delhi “A” Bench: New Delhi benchAY 2011-12Allowed

• MSB E Trade Securities Ltd. vs ACIT Central Circle-18 Delhi