ANGAD YADAV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 37(2), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7507/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 January 2020AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the appeal to the AO, directing the assessee to appear and prove his cloth trading business for presumptive taxation. The Tribunal noted that the lower authorities had not considered the evidence submitted by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited cash of Rs. 10,85,000/- in his bank account without filing a return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of this amount, which was confirmed by the CIT(A) as the assessee failed to provide evidence of his cloth trading business.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's cash deposits were from a legitimate cloth trading business eligible for presumptive taxation, and if the lower authorities properly considered the evidence provided.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “Friday E”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H.S.SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Appellant: Shri Alok Vasant, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Bimal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 25/10/2019Pronounced: 13/01/2020

Heard together (2 matters)

SA No. 909/Del/2019
ITA No. 7507/Del/2019

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M. 1. This stay application is filed by the assessee for stay of demand of Rs. 5,17,710/- until disposal of appeal. 2. Assessee has filed an appeal against the order of CIT(A)-37, New Delhi wherein, the addition made by the ld Assessing Officer of Rs. 1085000/- is confirmed. 3. The issue involved in the appeal is that assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 1085000/- in his bank account with ICICI Bank during FY 2010-11 Page | 1

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →