JEEVAN PRAKASH MALHOTRA,USA vs. ITO(INT TAXN)-1,HYD, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 37/HYD/2022Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 March 2022AY 2017-20182 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the lower authorities failed to consider the assessee's withdrawals from all Indian bank accounts for reconciliation. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 concerned an addition of Rs. 15,04,000/- for unexplained cash deposits. The lower authorities did not consider the telescoping benefit of the assessee's previous withdrawals against these deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition for unexplained cash deposits is valid without considering the telescoping benefit of prior withdrawals from all bank accounts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ SMC ‘ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Shri S.S. Godara

Hearing: 15/03/2022Pronounced: 21/03/2022

This assessee’s appeal for the A.Y 2017-18 arise against the CIT(A)-10, Hyderabad’s order dated 10.02.2022 passed in case No.ITBA/REC/F/154/2021-22/10396808649(1) in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(“the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that both the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in making section 69A unexplained cash deposits addition of Rs.15,04,000/- I find that the instant lis requires more a simultaneous reconciliation of his withdrawals in all bank accounts operated in India.

3.

Learned DR fails to dispute that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT (A) has considered telescoping benefit to the assessee regarding his all previous withdrawals vis-à-vis cash deposit in issue. I therefore, deem it proper to restore the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance back to the Assessing Officer for his fresh adjudication within three effective opportunities of hearing. The assessee shall be at liberty to file all the relevant evidence in consequential proceedings as per law.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →