SHETAL RAMESHBHAI MODI,ANKLESHWAR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), BHARUCH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee is a small trader dealing in a cash-oriented business. It was held that the Assessing Officer cannot make additions for both expenditure and estimated profit on the same item, as it would lead to double taxation. Therefore, the addition confirmed by the CIT(A) was deleted.
What were the facts?
During a search action, unaccounted purchases of Rs. 9,80,900/- were found to have been made by the assessee from a fireworks trading group. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 6,05,220/- as unexplained expenditure for the purchase of crackers.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition for unexplained expenditure on the purchase of crackers is sustainable when the assessee has offered business income on the sale of such crackers, and whether making additions for both expenditure and estimated profit on the same item is permissible.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 69C,Section 115BBE,Section 132,Section 147,Section 148A,Section 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”
Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini
Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2020- 21, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi, dated 14.01.2026, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act, on 26.03.2025. 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee informs the Bench that assessee does not wish to press Ground No
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 69C
- Jitendrakumar Bhikhabhai Shrimali, Mehsana vs ITO Ward 1, MehsaanaITA 1290/AHD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Sonu Jain, Agra vs ITO WD(1)(1)(2), AgraITA 671/AGR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Mritunjay Singh, Kudra vs AO, SasaramITA 454/PAT/2026[2017-2018]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2017-2018
- Shantilal Mafaji Kachchhava, Banaskantha vs ITO WD 1 Palanpur, PalanpurITA 2256/AHD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
- Madhusudhan Gade, Nizamabad vs ITO., Ward-1, NizamabadITA 379/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026