NARENDRAMOHAN KRIPASHANKAR SINGH ,MUMBAI vs. NFAC, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1460/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 May 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai (Judicial Member), Shri Omkareshwar Chidara( (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal decided that the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to revive if the Vivad Se Vishwas application is rejected. The appellant did not submit sources of income, and the CIT(A) confirmed the additions.

What were the facts?

The appeals concerned cash deposits made in ICICI Bank and other Banks for Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14. Additions were made under section 69A as the appellant did not submit sources of income.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits are justified, especially in light of the appellant availing the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “B” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Smt. Beena Pillai(JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara(AM)

For Appellant: Ms. Sudha Ramachandran
Pronounced: 07/05/2025
2.

Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), appeals were filed before the ITAT stating that the orders of Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) are not correct.

3.

At the time of hearing before the ITAT, Ld. AR of the appellant has submitted that the appellant has availed Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme.

2 Narendramohan Kripashankar Singh Accordingly, a letter alongwith copy of Form No. 1 of DTVSV 2024 filed by the appellant before the Income Tax Department was submitted to the Bench. The Ld. AR of the appellant has requested for adjournment as the DTVSV proceedings are pending before the Department. The request for adjournment was rejected and the papers filed by Ld. AR of the appellant were taken on record and the case was heard. It is decided that the appeals are dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to revive the appeals for both years, if the DTVSV application is rejected by the Department for any reason.

4.

The appeals of the appellant are dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07/05/2025.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →