SHIV SHAKTI ENTERPRISES,NANGAL, ROPAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NANGAL, NANGAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 307/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 April 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had furnished various documents to the lower authorities. It was observed that the CIT(A) failed to consider these documents. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the matter to the AO for a de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an order confirming an addition of Rs. 179.72 Lacs for cash deposits made during demonetization. The Assessing Officer made the addition due to a lack of reply from the assessee regarding the source of funds.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of cash deposits without considering the documents submitted by the assessee, and whether a de novo assessment is warranted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →