Subhash Runwal Vs ITO

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Succinctly stated facts of the cases are that; The assessee is an individual who failed to file his return of income for the year under consideration hence was identified as ‘non-filer’ by the Revenue. Upon the receipt of information that, the assessee deposited a cash of ₹44.75Lakhs into his saving bank account maintained with ‘Mahesh Sahakari Bank Ltd’ and was in receipt of certain interest of ₹1.625Lakhs from Mr Vinod Jain the case of the assessee after recording the reasons and obtaining prior approval of competent authority was re-opened u/s 148 of the Act vide notice dt. 30/03/2019. In the event of non-compliance from the assessee, the Ld. AO invoking the provisions of section 133(6) of the Act obtained a bank statement from MSBL which revealed him actual cash deposits for the year under consideration were to the extent of ₹54,75,000/- as against the information received through Annual Information Return on the basis of which case was re-opened. The assessee vide various notice issued to him u/s 148 & followed by 142(1) of the Act was called upon to explain nature & source such cash deposits. In pursuance of notices issued the assessee filed his return of income declaring total income of ₹1,68,257/- after considering the gross receipts/income received against (i) interest income, including interest received on balance advanced to two parties viz; M/s Vinod Construction & M/s BU Bhandari, (ii) brokerage income and (ii) saving bank interest etc. The said return of the ass…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether a legal ground raised first time before the Tribunal can be admitted?
• 2. Whether the reassessment was valid?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Shrinivas Vijaykumar Chidrewar Vs ITO

  Pune bench

• Mr. Gulab Singh vs. The ITO

  Chandigarh bench

• Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 10(1), R. No. 389A, 3rd Floor, CR Building, IP Estate, Delhi 110001 Vs. Jindal Poly Films Limited, 19th K.M. Hapur, Bulandshahar Road, P.O. Gulaothi, Bulandshahar, Uttar Pradesh 203408

  Delhi Bench 'C', Delhi benchAY 2012-13Dismissed

• M/s Fairdeal Information Technology Private Limited vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(1), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘B’ benchAY 2013-14Allowed

• ITA no. 2845/Del/2023

  Delhi bench

• Mr. Suresh Laxman Padhye vs. The I.T.O. – 26(3)(3)

  Mumbai bench