ASHISH DWIVEDI,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO RANGE-1(1), ALLAHABAD

ITA 158/ALLD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad07 April 2021AY 2013-148 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the addition on account of business income was wrongly classified under Section 69 and should be treated as business income. The addition for unexplained investment in property was deleted as the assessee explained the source. The issue of unexplained bank deposits was remanded for verification, and the deduction under Section 80TTA was to be allowed if eligible.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns additions made to his income for AY 2013-14, including business income, unexplained investment in property, and unexplained bank deposits. The assessee also claimed a deduction under Section 80TTA.

What were the issues?

Whether additions were correctly classified and substantiated, and whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80TTA.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 44AF,Section 80TTA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ALLAHABAD BENCH ‘SMC’ ALLAHABAD

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Kumar Yadav, Adv
For Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 24/03/2021Pronounced: 07/04/2021

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.09.2019 of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. “Because the proper opportunity of being heard not provided by the appellant authority during the appeal proceedings.

2.

Because the order of the appellant authority against the natural justice.

3.

Because the order of the appellant authority is arbitrary bad in eye of law.

4.

Because the appellant authority failed to consider the facts and evidences as submitted by the appellant during the appeal proceedings.

5.

Because the CIT (Appeal) and Ld. Assessing Officer erred both

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →