VINEET SHARMA,KANPUR vs. ACIT-CC-2, KANPUR

ITA 261/LKW/2024Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 September 2026AY 2019-209 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to admit and examine crucial documentary evidence submitted by the assessee, violating principles of natural justice. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after admitting the evidence.

What were the facts?

During a search operation, the assessee's Rs. 10.00 lakh loan from M/s Saryu Construction Company was added to income under Section 69A for failure to prove the lender's identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the transaction. The CIT(A) upheld this addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by not admitting additional evidence and whether the assessment was based on incriminating material found during the search.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 143(3),Section 115BBE,Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA & SHRI NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Gupta, C.A

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 23.02.2024, passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Kanpur – 4 [Ld. CIT(A)] for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee derives income from salary, capital gain, income from house property and also from other sources. A Search and Seizure operation under section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act’) was carried out on 17.01.2019 at the premises of Dr. M.C. Sharma, S.P.M. Hospital and Trauma Centre group cases. Simultaneously, search was also carried out at the premises of ITA No.261/LKW/2024 the assessee under appeal. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration o

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 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →