NIRANJAN DWARI THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SAIRENDRI DWARI,SUNDARGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JHARSUGUDA
Facts
The assessee, an individual engaged in contract work and plying vehicles, was a partner in a firm running a petrol pump. The Assessing Officer (AO) noticed substantial cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts, including one in the name of the partnership firm. The AO estimated the assessee's income at 2% of the cash deposits, noting subsequent transfers to Indian Oil Corporation.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to provide necessary details to the AO, and the bank account claimed as belonging to the partnership firm was shown by the AO to belong to the individual assessee. The partnership firm had not filed its return, and the assessee's conduct was deemed contumacious.
Key Issues
Whether the additions made by the AO based on unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts are justified, especially when the assessee claims the transactions belong to a partnership firm which has not filed its return.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK” BENCH, CUTTACK
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK” BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No. 516/CTK/2024 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Niranjan Dwari (Through legal heir Sairendri Income Tax officer, Ward-1, Dwari) Jharsuguda, Odisha-768201 Vs. M-61, R.R.I.T. Colony, rangadhipa, Odisha-770001 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AESPD2117D Assessee by : Shri Manoj Kumar Sultania, AR Revenue by : Shri Nishanth Rao B, DR Date of hearing: 17.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 17.07.2025
O R D E R PER PENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. JCIT(A)-4, Chennai in appeal no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1070549892(1) dated 22.11.2024 for A.Y. 2014-15.
Shri Manoj Kumar Sultania represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Nishanth Rao B, represented on behalf of the Revenue.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is an individual who is doing contract work and plying vehicles. It was the submission that the assessee was a partner in a partnership firm under the name and style of M/s Kamleswar Filling Station. The said partnership firm was running a petrol pump. It was the submission that the ld. AO in the course of assessment noticed that there were substantial cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. The ld. AO had consequently asked the
In reply, the ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has not provided any details before the ld. AO. It was the submission that the ld. CIT (A) has considered the submissions of the assessee and has taken a stand that M/s Kamleswar Filling Station has also not shown any income nor has filed its return of income and had consequently confirmed the additions made. It was the submission that the order of the ld. JCIT (A)- 4, Chennai is liable to be upheld.
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order in the present case clearly shows that the ld. AO has brought out the 4 bank accounts in page 2 para 3 of the assessment order. The said current account in IndusInd bank, Sundargarh, which is being claimed to be partnership clearly has been shown by the ld. AO as belong to Mr. Niranjan Dwari, the assessee herein. Therefore, it no manner survives
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17.07.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 17.07.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
