Sudhanshu Shekhar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Gaya

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Sudhanshu Shekhar, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, which confirmed an addition of Rs. 18,70,000/- towards cash deposited in the bank account. The assessee claimed that he had discharged the onus by proving the source of the cash deposit through complete books of accounts and bank statements. The assessee also argued that the cash deposits were related to withdrawals from the proprietor's capital account of the firm. Additionally, the assessee cited severe illness as a reason for the delay in filing the appeal and sought condonation of the delay. The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. However, during the proceedings, it was informed that the assessee had availed the Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme, 2024, rendering the appeal infructuous.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer.
• 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.18,70,000/- towards cash deposited in the bank account.
• 3. Whether the income determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.18,70,000/- is illegal, invalid, and bad in law.
• 4. Whether the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not accepting the contention of the assessee and confirming the income under section 69A and charging tax under section 115BBE.
• 5. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs 18,70,000/- made under section 69A of the Income Tax Act.
• 6. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing sufficient opportunity to the appellant before disposing of the appeal.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• JIT PAL SINGH Vs. Ward2(2), Gurgaon.

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Shri Bantupalli Varaprasad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Raichur

  Bangalore benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Sanjay vs. ITO, Ward-2

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Income Tax Officer, Room No.238B, 2nd Floor, C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Delhi-110002 Vs. Sukam Jewellers Pvt Ltd.

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2017-18Dismissed

• VED PRAKASH VS. ITO, WARD 3, REWARI HARYANA

  DELHI BENCH benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Ashish Bansal Vs. ITO, Ward-35(1), New Delhi