SHYAMKARAN SINGH,GAYA BIHAR vs. ASSTT COMMISSIONER , GAYA
What were the facts?
The assessee, dealing in fertilizer, filed a return of income. The case was selected for scrutiny due to high cash receipts, low profit from house property, and cash deposits during demonetization. The Assessing Officer (AO) rejected the assessee's books of accounts under Section 145(3) and made additions.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal observed that the AO had rightly applied Section 145(3) of the Act. However, in the interest of justice, the issue was remanded back to the AO for a fresh decision, directing the assessee to substantiate its claims with cogent documents.
What were the issues?
Whether the AO was justified in rejecting the assessee's books of accounts under Section 145(3) and making additions to income. The proper treatment of income from house property and handling charges was also a key issue.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 145(3),Section 250,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 194IB,Section 24(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PATNA
PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)] dated
2 Shyamkaran Singh 28.06.2024, DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1066185162(1) on the following grounds of appeal:
“1. Because the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (A) NFAC was not justified to confirmed the application of provision of section 145(3) of the income tax Act and rejected the books of accou
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 145(3)
- Chandresh Vishanji Pandit, Rajkot vs DCIT/ACIT-2(1), RajkotITA 851/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Chandresh Vishanji Pandit, Rajkot vs DCIT / ACIT-2(1), RajkotITA 759/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Rakesh Kumar Khare, Tikamgarh vs Income Tax Officer Ward, TikamgarhITA 59/JAB/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad… vs Ankitkumar Pravinkumar Shah, PaldiITA 542/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Rakesh Kumar Khare, Tikamgarh vs Income Tax Officer Ward, TikamgarhITA 59/JAB/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shaik Mohammed Abdul Jabbar vs. The Principal Commissioner/CommissionerTelangana · 7 Oct 2026
- Kamalakanta Nayak vs. The Additional CT And GST Officer, Mayurbhanj Circle,BalasoreOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- Jagadish Prasad Agrawala vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- M/S.Shree Jagannath Engineering Co.,Kendujhar vs. Assistant Commissioner Central GST And Customs, KeonjharOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- Gagan Kumar Das vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 7 Oct 2026