LIAQAT ALI,YAMUNA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-5, YAMUNA NAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 130/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh08 April 2026AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee prima facie appeared to be in a position to substantiate the cash deposits. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the AO for a fresh assessment, directing the assessee to prove its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on a best judgment basis, which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The addition was for cash deposits in a bank for which the assessee provided no explanation. The assessee claimed the deposits were from agricultural income and earlier withdrawals.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits in the bank were adequately substantiated by the assessee and if the AO and CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition on best judgment basis without proper appreciation of evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

(िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Liaqat Ali ITO Ward – 5 Majri (249), PO: Dayalgarh Yamuna Nagar बनाम/ Vs. Distt. Yamuna Nagar, Haryana-135102 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BMVPA-0760-R (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 08-04-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 08-04-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R

1.

1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012- 13 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 12-12-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 01-11-2019. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal.

2.

In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit in PNB for Rs.44.12 Lacs for want of any compliance from the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same for want of documentary evidences from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before Tribunal.

3.

From assessee’s submissions, it would appear that the deposits have been sourced out of agricultural income. The proof by way of sale deeds has apparently been furnished to Ld. AO. The substantial deposits are stated to be sourced out of earlier withdrawals. It would prima-facie appear that the assessee could be in a position to substantiate the cash deposits. Therefore, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, I set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 08th April, 2026.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →