Umar Faruk Suleman Asmal vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Umar Faruk Suleman Asmal, was engaged in renting sheds to store agricultural produce and agricultural activities during the year under consideration and earlier years. The assessee filed the return of income for the Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 on 29.03.2016, declaring a total income of Rs. 4,53,130/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for AY 2013-14 on 19.09.2016. The assessee replied on 19.10.2016, stating that the source of the share purchased in the property of Rs. 36,22,960/- was his own capital. The AO passed an order considering all payments made as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act without issuing a notice under section 133(6) to Ishwarbhai Parsottambhai Patel from whom loans were received back. The assessee was unable to reply to the show cause notice due to his involvement in the Grampanchayat Election Campaign in December 2016.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the order of AO in making addition of Rs. 36,22,960/- u/s 69 of the Act.
• 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in rejecting the Additional Evidence Rule 46A.
• 3. Whether the CIT(A) erred in not considering Loan Repayment of Rs. 17,00,000/-.
• 4. Whether the CIT(A) erred in not considering Agricultural, Rent Income & Capital Availability.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Bhupender Sandhu Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3)(4), Hapur

• ITO Ward-16(3) Delhi vs Nischint A Kanoudia

• NEW DELHI UP ROAD CARRIERS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. PR. CIT-4, NEW DELHI

  Delhi Bench ‘B’, New Delhi benchAY 2022-23Dismissed

• ITA No. 1839/Del/2024

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2014-15Dismissed

• M/s. Terapanth Tracon Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, Kolkata-II

  Kolkata bench

• Sapra Iron Store vs. Income Tax Officer

  Delhi Bench 'C', Delhi benchAY 2012-13 & 2013-14Allowed