SUNIL KUMAR,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(3)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer can make additions on issues that come to his notice during reassessment, even if they are different from the original reason for reopening, as per jurisdictional High Court precedent. However, the merits of the cash deposit addition were not properly examined by the lower authorities.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment of the assessee for the purchase of a car. During reassessment, the AO noticed cash deposits of Rs. 32,87,500 in the assessee's bank account and made an addition on this basis, even though the reopening was for a different issue.
What were the issues?
Whether an AO can make additions on issues not forming the basis of reopening, and whether the addition for cash deposits was properly substantiated and examined on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 44AD,Section 148,Section 133(6),Section 250,Section 234B,Section 234D
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
PER SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT
The Assessee has filed this appeal against the appellate order dated 7 January 2026 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT(A)] for assessment year 2020-21, dismissing the Assessee’s appeal against the reassessment order dated 6 January 2025 passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [the learned AO].
ITA 1428/BA
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.
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 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026