Question 1

What are the key legal issues in Suneel Kumar Gupta vs. The Income Tax Officer?

Accepted Answer

1. Whether the notices sent to the assessee were properly served and complied with? 2. Whether the Assessing Officer correctly applied the provisions of section 69A of the Act?

Question 2

What are the facts of Suneel Kumar Gupta vs. The Income Tax Officer?

Accepted Answer

The facts of the case are that the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2)(5), Banda, Uttar Pradesh came into possession of information that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.17,86,000/- in his bank A/c No. 31843811589 at State Bank of India, Rath, Hamirpur. He, therefore, issued a notice under section 142(1) to the assessee to submit documentary evidences in support of the same and proof of filing of ITR for the year under consideration. But the same was not complied with. Subsequently, he issued four more notices under section 142(1) including a show cause notice for passing the orders under section 144 of the Act, but none of them were complied with. Therefore, he issued notices under section 133(6) of the Act to respective bank branches and recorded his opinion that a perusal of the bank statement did not reveal any business transaction. The ld. Assessing Officer further held that without any written submissions or documentary evidences, it was not possible to ascertain the business activity of the assessee. He further observed that the assessee had not received any of the notices and all the notices sent by him had returned unserved. He, therefore, on examination of the account observed that a total of Rs.1,42,65,729/- was deposited in the said bank account during F.Y. 2016-17 and because the assessee had not submitted any explanation with regard to these deposits, he treated the same as unexplained and added the same back to the income of the assessee under the provisions of

Suneel Kumar Gupta vs. The Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Legal Issues

Judgment Outcome

Similar Judgements