BAKTIAR ALI KHAN ,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 27(1),, HALDIA

ITA 210/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 July 2026AY 2020-20217 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed agricultural income of Rs. 26,67,258/-, supported by a Gram Pradhan's certificate and financial statements. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) found discrepancies and noted the assessee changed their story regarding the source of income, leading to an addition under Section 68.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the addition made by the AO, finding that the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to substantiate the claimed agricultural income and expenses. The assessee's inconsistent submissions and lack of corroborating documents were key factors.

What were the issues?

Whether the agricultural income claimed by the assessee was sufficiently substantiated with evidence, and if the addition made by the AO under Section 68 for unexplained cash credit was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 2(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Amit Shaw, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Subrata Aich, JCIT, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 02.07.2026

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 22.07.2025, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1078753885(1) on the following grounds of appeal:

“1. For that the order of the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC u/s 250 of the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed.

2 Baktiar Ali Khan

2.

For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in ignoring the documents and information provided during the appellate proceedings and p

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 68

All 29,634 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →