ANIL KUMAR RAI,SIKKIM vs. ITO, WARD 3(1),, GANGTOK
What were the facts?
The assessee failed to file an income tax return for AY 2017-18, leading to a best judgment assessment. The Assessing Officer (AO) added cash deposits of ₹46,74,000/- as unexplained under Section 69A and estimated business income at 8% of bank credits.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the assessee could not furnish required documents to justify the exemption claim under Section 10(26AAA) or prove income accrual in Sikkim, the matter should be remanded to the AO for fresh assessment.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is eligible for exemption under Section 10(26AAA) as a Sikkimese and whether the cash deposits are unexplained income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 10(26AAA),Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 142(1),Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for AY 2017-18 dated 21.01.2026. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:
"
For that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] was not justified in confirming the assessment order passed under section 144. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in holding that the
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 10(26AAA)
- Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, Sikkim, Gangtok vs I.T.O., Ward - 3(1), GangtokITA 2630/KOL/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2019-2020
- Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Kolkata vs D.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), KolkataITA 1860/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2013-2014
- Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Kolkata vs D.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), KolkataITA 1859/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2012-2013
- Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Gangtok, Sikkim vs D.C.I.T., CC - 3(2), KolkataITA 1858/KOL/2025[2011-2012]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2011-2012
- Ashok Agarwal, Sikkim vs ITO, Circle 3(2), GangtokITA 2467/KOL/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed14 Sept 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Smita Chawda vs. Aadharshila Developers PVT LTD.Chhattisgarh · 6 Oct 2026
- Sahil vs. M/S Aadharshila Developers PVT LTD.Chhattisgarh · 6 Oct 2026
- Mayank Arc And Electrodes Private Limited & Anr. vs. Assistant Commissioner CGST Laxmi Nagar Division & Ors.Delhi · 6 Oct 2026
- Jogender Proprietor Of M/S J.K. Construction vs. The Joint Commissioner (Appeals-Ii) & Anr.Delhi · 6 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Murugan Tyres vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer-1/ The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 6 Oct 2026