TULJA SINGH MADABALOO,HYDERABAD vs. ITO,, WARD-7(2), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 508/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: us : (i) The ex-parte assessment order dated 29.11.2019 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad, for the assessment year 2017-18 is quite contrary to law, against weight of evidence and probabilities of the case. (ii) The petitioner could not represent before the Income Tax Officer, as the Chartered Accountant, Mr.N.Laxminarayana was not well and was advised complete bed, resulted into ex-parte assessment order. Further the appeal filed could not be represented before the Com14 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal admitted additional evidence, including details of bounced cheques for Rs.21 lakhs, clarifying they were not cash deposits. It restricted the addition under Section 68 to Rs.84,240, accepting Rs.2 lakhs as accumulated savings for the remaining Rs.2.82 lakhs. Furthermore, the tribunal directed the AO to re-adjudicate the claim for deduction under Chapter VIA after considering the submitted tuition fee receipts.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a laundryman, filed a return declaring income of Rs.3,50,300 for AY 2017-18. His case was selected for scrutiny due to large cash deposits (Rs.23,84,240) during demonetization, which the AO treated as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 and also disallowed a Chapter VIA deduction of Rs.34,000. Due to the illness and subsequent demise of his Chartered Accountant, the assessee could not represent his case, leading to ex-parte orders from both the AO and CIT(A).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the cash deposits made during the demonetization period constitute unexplained cash credits under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. 2. Whether the disallowance of deduction claimed under Chapter VIA was justified. 3. Whether additional evidence could be admitted given the non-appearance due to the Chartered Accountant's illness and demise.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 68,Section 115BBE,Section 270A,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘SMC-A’ Bench, Hyderabad

आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:- 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Shri Tulja Singh Madabaloo13-3-600/B, Venkateswara Nagar, Ziaguda, Hyderabad 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Hyderabad 4. नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, हैदरधबधद / DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5. गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file

आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER

Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Hyderabad

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →