MURLI DHAR UPADHYAY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(3), JPR, JAIPUR

ITA 252/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO exceeded his jurisdiction by making additions beyond the scope of limited scrutiny for cash deposits. The additions were quashed for want of valid assumption of jurisdiction.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a milk distributor, filed his return and his case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for cash deposits during demonetization. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions for disallowance under Section 40A(3) and lump-sum expenses, exceeding the scope of limited scrutiny.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessing Officer exceeded the scope of limited scrutiny by making additions unrelated to the original reason for selection of the case. Whether the assessment proceedings were vitiated due to violation of principles of natural justice and lack of proper show cause notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40A(3),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 250(4),Section 250(6),Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR

Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 252/JPR/2025

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kumar Gupta, Adv
Hearing: 10/07/2025Pronounced: 16/09/2025

PER DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 25.09.2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ld. CIT(A)], for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:–

“1. The assessee is a distributer of Milk of Saras Dairy, Jaipur, Bhilwara and Chittorgarh Dairy. Filed Income T

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 40A(3)

All 3,278 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40A(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →