RAGHAVAMMA V THATIPATTI,WEST GODAVARI DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHIMAVARAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 610/VIZ/2025Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 December 2025AY 2017-18Bench: the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) after considering the information furnished by the assessee, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had adequately explained the source of the cash deposits by demonstrating previous large cash withdrawals and a regular pattern of withdrawing and redepositing funds after incurring expenditures. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that the addition made by the AO was not justified and directed its deletion.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in fish culture, did not file an ITR for AY 2017-18. The department identified significant cash deposits and credits, leading to an assessment framed under Section 147 read with Section 144 read with Section 144B, with an addition of Rs. 4,87,000 as unexplained money under Section 69A. The CIT(A) upheld the addition due to the assessee's non-response to notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of cash deposits as unexplained money under Section 69A was justified, given the explanation of previous cash withdrawals and the procedural validity of the reassessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 148,Section 44AD,Section 142(1),Section 147,Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 151A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

आदेशकीप्रनतनलनपअग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/The : Smt.Raghavamma V.Thatipatti, #1-148/1, Near Church, Pamulaparru, Undi Assessee Mandalam, West Godavari Dist. 2. रधजस्व/ : The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, The Bhimavaram Revenue 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam 4. नवभधगीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण / DR,ITAT, Visakhapatnam.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →