SMT. SUDESH KUMARI SHARMA,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6, KATHUA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the cash deposit of Rs. 4 lakhs was covered by the disclosed gross sales under Section 44AD. Since no addition was made regarding the original reasons for reopening, the standalone addition was deleted.
What were the facts?
The assessee's income was reassessed after information arose from a survey on a third party, indicating an investment in land. The assessment resulted in an addition of Rs. 4 lakhs for cash deposited in the bank.
What were the issues?
Whether the cash deposit in the bank can be considered as unexplained income when it is covered by the disclosed gross turnover under Section 44AD, and if additions can be made on issues unrelated to the original reasons for reopening.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 44AD,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: SH. S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA
Per: Udayan Dasgupta, JM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, passed u/s 250 of the IT Act, 1961, dated 19.06.2025, which has emanated from the order of the AO, passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144B of the Act, dated 30.03.2022. 2. Brief facts of this case are that the assessee has filed her return of income disclosing an income of Rs. 6,12,147/- which consists of business profits of Rs. 1.32 lakhs, arising out of “Kirana Business” on a disclosed turnover of Rs. 16.50 lakhs (which works out to 8% of gross u/s 44AD of the Act), apart from interest income from bank.
The assessment was reopened vide notice u/s 148 dated 31/03/2021, on the basis of information
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 →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026