SEKH NAZIBUL ALAM,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 388/KOL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 March 2023AY 2017-20183 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the cash deposits were not unaccounted income but were part of the assessee's business model to earn livelihood. The lower authorities were not justified in disallowing the amount under Section 69A.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a commission agent, deposited cash into his bank account which was then used to recharge a fuel card. This fuel card was used to purchase fuel for trucks, and the assessee earned income through points generated by the fuel recharge card.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits used for fuel card recharge constituted unexplained money under Section 69A, and if the assessee was denied an opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg

आदेश / ORDER The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 19.05.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. The ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC erred in confirming the addition made by the A.O to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/- u/s 69A of the Act.

2. The ld. CIT(Appeals), NFAC passed the order without giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sekh Nazibul Alam

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →