CHANDERAKANTA H LALIA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO, 28(1)(3), VASHI RAILWAY STATION

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2014-15, raising following grounds: 01. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned Additional / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming following additions made by the learned Assessing Officer:


Additio deposi provisi

Additio credit provisi

Additio receive
Source

Additio the hea

Provisi regard should
02 On the fac the learned
(Appeals) erre of the Act and the Act which the Act and lia
03. The learn
(Appeals) erre the Act whi juri iction a hearing, with their proper p
04. The learn
(Appeals) erre
234B and 234
2. Before us, learn the very same asses electronically and ha
No. 5794/Mum/202
Vivad se Vishwas Sc filed physically and adjudication.
ITA on of Rs.660500/- on account of unexp its in Bank account of the appellant ion of section 69A of the Act.
on of Rs.400000/- on account of unexp in Bank account of the appellant ion of section 69A of the Act.
on of Rs.36556/- on account of differenc ed from Bank under the head 'Income es'.
on of Rs. 194596/- on account of notiona ad 'Income from House Property.'
ions of the Act ought to have properly co being had to facts of the case abov d not have been confirmed.
cts and in the circumstances of the case
Additional / Joint Commissioner of ed in confirming issuance of notice under d assessment made under section 143(3
h is without juri iction, contrary to the p able to be annulled.
ned Additional / Joint Commissioner of ed in confirming order made under secti ich is illegal, bad-in- law, ultra vir and without allowing reasonable opport hout appreciating facts, submission and perspective is liable to be annulled.
ned Additional / Joint Commissioner of ed in confirming charging of interest u
4C and 234D of the Act ned counsel for the assessee su ssment year, an appeal had alr as since been disposed of by the 4, the matter having been se cheme, 2024. The present appe d being a duplicate, does n
Chanderakanta H Lalia
2
A No. 5693/MUM/2024
plained cash by invoking plained cash by invoking ce in interest e from Other al rent under onstrued and ve additions e and in law
Income Tax r section 148
3) rws 147 of provisions of f Income tax ion 143(3) of rus, without tunity of the evidences in f Income Tax under section ubmits that, for ready been filed
Tribunal in ITA ttled under the eal, having been not survive for 3. Accordingly, the infructuous.
Order pronoun (RAJ KUMAR C
JUDICIAL M
Mumbai;
Dated: 14/08/2025
Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.

Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.

////

ITA e appeal is dismissed as h ced in the open Court on 14/0
/-
CHAUHAN)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :

BY ORDER

(Assistant Re

ITAT, Mu

Chanderakanta H Lalia
3
A No. 5693/MUM/2024
having become
08/2025. KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
R, gistrar) umbai