SUHAIEL ALI,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(5), SHAHJANPUR

ITA 526/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 June 2026AY 2016-1711 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's submissions and evidence were not considered by the lower authorities. Therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an addition of Rs. 12,78,456/- made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A) on account of unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts. The assessee claimed that both cash and credit entries were explained with documentary evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order and properly consider the documentary evidence submitted by the assessee regarding cash and credit entries in bank accounts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 143(3),Section 253(3),Section 253(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.

(A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik [‘learned CIT(A)’ for short], dated 17.03.2025, for the AY 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “Because the learned CIT (Appeals) Bareilly erred in not Dictating a Self Speaking Order. The assessee made written submission along with all the necessary Documentary evidences to justify the stand as it did during assessment proceeding, but there is no finding of the CIT (A) in his Order. Because the learned CIT (Appeals) Bareilly erred in establishing the Fact that the assessee deposited the entire amount of Rs 12,7

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 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →