Sunita Gupta vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The case involves Sunita Gupta, who was assessed for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The Assessing Officer (AO) passed an order under sections 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, adding Rs. 3,54,565/- to her business income as bogus profit from trading in commodities. Sunita Gupta appealed this decision to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (Ld. CIT(A)), who confirmed the addition in an ex-parte manner due to non-compliance with notices. Sunita Gupta then filed the present appeal, arguing that the addition was erroneous and based on incorrect presumptions. She also highlighted a communication gap that led to her not receiving notices from the Ld. CIT(A).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the orders passed by the lower authorities were arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons, invalid, and bad-in-law.
• 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the order passed by the AO without appreciating the assumptions of jurisdiction under section 148 of the Act.
• 3. Whether the addition of Rs. 3,54,565/- on account of bogus commodity profit was correct.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Prompt Commodities Limited Vs. ITO, Ward 12(1)

  Kolkata benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Divya Panwar vs DCIT

  Delhi "B" Bench: New Delhi benchAY 2019-20Allowed

• Debasis Mukhopadhyay vs. Income Tax Officer

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2011-12Allowed

• Maharashtra Corporation Limited Vs. ITO Ward 4(2)(1)

  Mumbai benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• ITA No. 5983/Mum/2025 & CO No. 325/Mum/2025

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2018-19Dismissed

• Gargi Overseas Pvt. Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1), Delhi

  Delhi Bench 'A', New Delhi benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed