Vikash Kumar v. The Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Vikash Kumar, did not file the return of income for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer noticed cash deposits of Rs.11,42,000/- in the bank account of the assessee between 09.11.2016 and 30.12.2016. The AO issued notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but there was no response from the assessee. The AO completed the assessment as best judgment assessment under section 144 of the Act, assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs.72,63,010/- by making an addition of Rs.72,63,010/- under section 69A of the Act. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271F of the Act. The assessee appealed to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), who partly allowed the appeal, restricting the addition under section 69A to Rs.11,42,000/-. The assessee then approached the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal challenging the ex-parte order passed by the NFAC.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Enhancement of income by estimating net profit @ 8% of disclosed turnover without issuing notice of enhancement as per section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
• 2. Addition of Rs.11,42,000/- on account of cash deposits during the demonetization period treating as unexplained money by invoking the provision of 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Mo Taj Jharodiya Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Rajnandgaon

  Raipur bench

• Shri. Devadass Suresh Vs. DCIT

  Bangalore benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• AJAY PRATAP RAMAN VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(5), GHAZIABAD

  DELHI BENCH benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Lakhmi Chand Khushiramani vs. Income Tax Officer

  Agra bench

• Gandaram & Sons Jewellers Pvt Ltd Vs. The A.C.I.T.

  Delhi ‘F’ Bench benchAY 2017-18Partly Allowed

• SATINDER PAL VS. ITO, WARD 34(5), NEW DELHI

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2015-16Allowed