NARESH KACHOLIYA,BHILWARA vs. ITO, WARD-5, BHILWARA

ITA 216/JODH/2019Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur25 August 2026AY 2016-1710 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the returned income was accepted and the consequential penalty under Section 271B was deleted, the grounds challenging the turnover computation and applicability of Section 44AB had become infructuous. No further adjudication was required as there were no adverse tax consequences.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer treated the transaction value of shares and derivatives as turnover and observed that the assessee was required to get accounts audited under Section 44AB. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as premature since no addition or penalty was made at that stage. Subsequently, a penalty under Section 271B was levied but later deleted by another CIT(A) on grounds of reasonable cause.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal challenging the observation regarding turnover computation and Section 44AB applicability is maintainable when the consequential penalty has been deleted and no addition was made to the returned income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44AB,Section 271B,Section 273B,Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH JODHPUR

For Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, Addl. CIT-DR
Hearing: 04.08.2026Pronounced: 25.08.2026

PER: MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 13.05.2019 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ajmer [“learned CIT(A)”], under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”], for the assessment year 2016-17. The impugned appellate order arises from the 2 Shri Naresh Kacholiya assessment order dated 05.12.2018 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Bhilwara, under section 143(3) of the Act.

2.

The grounds raised by the assessee, as contained in Form No. 36, are reproduced as under:

“In facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law the lower authorities here to grossly erred and

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 44AB

All 2,486 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →