Sri.Veeranna Murthy Raghavendra Deekshith vs. The Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Sri.Veeranna Murthy Raghavendra Deekshith, is a wholesale and retail distributor of Cadbury products in North Bangalore. For the assessment year 2017-18, he declared a taxable income of Rs.10,06,240/-. His income comprised a loss under the head House Property of Rs.3,90,981/- and income from Profits and Gains of Business of Rs. 15,47,216/-. The assessee's business model involves receiving cash from sales and collections from debtors, which are deposited into banks at regular intervals. During the demonetization period in November 2016, the assessee deposited a sum of Rs.65,13,410/- in cash into his bank accounts. The Assessing Officer added Rs.50,25,540/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after making certain deductions. The assessee appealed this addition before the CIT(A)/NFAC, which upheld the AO's order. Aggrieved by this, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the notice issued under section 143(2) of the Act is bad in law for not being in the prescribed format?
• 2. Whether the addition of Rs. 50,25,540/- as unexplained cash credit is justified?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• PR & Co. vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Erode

• Nikunjkumar Narbheram Thakkar Vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench

• ITO, Ward-21(1), Room No.220, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110002 Vs M/s Retro Footwear Private Limited

• JASMEET SINGH WALIA VS. ITO, WARD 58(8), NEW DELHI

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• ITA No. 955/Del/2024

  Delhi Bench ‘G’, New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Dismissed

• Shri Rathi Steel (Dakshin) Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-16, New Delhi-110055

  Delhi Bench ‘F’, New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed