MAITREYEE PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) NAGPUR, NAGPUR

ITA 806/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 June 2026AY 2013-20145 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had made payments in the subsequent year through banking channels and that the cheques were not encashed initially because the sellers wished to retain the flat. The Tribunal held that evidence of cancellation deeds was not required in this case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case was reopened, and the Assessing Officer made additions of Rs. 53 lakhs on account of amounts payable to three persons as on 31.03.2013, as the assessee failed to provide documentary evidence for the source of payments. The CIT(A) sustained these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of outstanding payables were justified without sufficient documentary evidence of source and cancellation of transactions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 250,Section 271(1)(c),Section 271F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G Moryani, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, CIT DR
Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 18.06.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 18/11/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. 2. On hearing both the sides, we find that the assessee’s case was reopened and Assessing Officer examined the issue of amounts standing payable as on 31.03.2013 in respect of three persons and with following findings mere additions of `. 53/– Lacs were made, as under;–

“2 . In response to the notices issued, the assessee submitted that it had made payment to high rise construction of R

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 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →