SANTOSH KUMAR,FATEHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), FATEHPUR

ITA 19/ALLD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 June 2026AY 2017-1810 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that there was no valid order under Section 127 for the transfer of jurisdiction, making the assessment order by the Srinagar AO legally invalid. However, on merits, the Tribunal noted that the cash deposit was only Rs. 5.58 lakhs and not Rs. 24.20 lakhs.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a proprietor of a cement trading business, had cash deposits during demonetization. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 24.20 lakhs under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits. The assessee argued that the actual deposit was Rs. 5.58 lakhs from business proceeds and that the AO lacked jurisdiction.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to pass the assessment order and the validity of the addition made on account of cash deposits during demonetization.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 127,Section 124(3)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.

Before: DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA

For Appellant: CA (Virtual)
Hearing: 19.03.2026Pronounced: 12.06.2026

Per: Udayan Dasgupta, JM:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, passed u/s 250 of the IT Act, 1961, dated 20.12.2023, which has emanated from the order of the AO, Ward-3, Srinagar, passed u/s 144 of the Act, dated 30.12.2019. 2. The grounds of appeal taken in Form 36 are as follows:

“1. That in any view of the matter assessment made of Rs.26,68,110/- by order dated 30.12.2019 passed under section 144 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act is bad both on the fact and in law. Assessment Year: 2017-18 2

2.

That in any view of the matter the assessing officer was wrong in assuming juri iction of the case when the correct juri iction lies with th

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 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →