Uddaraju Rohini vs. The Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Uddaraju Rohini, made cash deposits of Rs. 13,07,500/- in her bank accounts during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, calling for the assessee to file her return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee failed to file the return and did not comply with the notices issued. Consequently, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under section 144 of the Act. After verification of the information provided by the assessee and the information obtained from bank authorities, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and added the cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which dismissed the appeal. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam SMC Bench, raising grounds that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was contrary to the facts and law applicable to the case.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and law applicable to the case.
• 2. Whether the addition of Rs. 13,07,500/- made by the Assessing Officer towards unexplained cash deposits during demonetization period is justified.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Purama Ramakrishna Rao vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Visakhapatnam bench

• Gollo Tara vs ITO Ward, North Lakhimpur

  Guwahati bench

• Shaik Abdul Zilani vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Visakhapatnam bench

• State Board of Technical Education and Training AP vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax

  Visakhapatnam bench

• Smt. Bimla Kaur Multani vs. ITO, Ward Dasuya

  Amritsar bench

• Smt. Murugarathinasamy Sangeetha v. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(1), Erode

  Chennai bench