SHRI RAMESH SINGH RANA,LUCKNOW vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, LUCKNOW
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the books of accounts by the Assessing Officer under Section 145(3) as the assessee failed to produce supporting documents and provide satisfactory explanations for the fall in Net Profit. The additions made by the Assessing Officer were confirmed.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's books of accounts under Section 145(3) due to non-confirmation of notices, less TDS deduction by suppliers, and discrepancies in Form 26AS. The CIT(A) confirmed this rejection and made additions to the total income.
What were the issues?
Whether the rejection of books of accounts under Section 145(3) by the AO was justified and whether the subsequent additions made to the income were sustainable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- M/s Rishi Steel & Alloys Pvt Ltd. v. ACIT7 citing51 Taxmann.com 515 · 2014 · ITAT
- DCIT Gurgaon v. JSL Architecture of Han’ble ITAT, Delhi Bench6 citing43 Taxmann.com 246 · 2014 · HC
- CIT v. Anand Kumar Modi4 citing44 Taxmann.com 21 · 2014 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: This appeal filed by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Lucknow dated 11.06.2019, pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -
“1.Because the Ld. AO has reject the books of accounts u/s 145(3), of IT Act, 1961, on the basis of non confirmation notice u/s 133(3); less TDS deduction by the supplier or difference
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 145(3)
- M/S. Sarvesh Mercantile Private Limited… vs DCIT Central Circle 2(1), MumbaiITA 1952/MUM/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- M/S. Sarvesh Mercantile Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central…ITA 1951/MUM/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- M/S. Sarvesh Mercantile Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central…ITA 1950/MUM/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax… vs Pacifica India Projects Private Limited…ITA 2336/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax… vs Pacifica Builders Private Limited, AhmedabadITA 2335/AHD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026