MAHESH KUMAR HEMRAJANI,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-40(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 3657/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 December 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee had availed business loans of Rs. 7,30,000/- and repaid Rs. 7,03,000/- by cheque. Considering the assessee's socio-economic status, past savings, and cash withdrawals, the Tribunal decided to delete Rs. 9.06 lakhs of the impugned addition. The remaining Rs. 1 lakh of the addition was affirmed, providing the assessee relief of Rs. 9.06 lakhs.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17 against an addition of Rs. 10,06,000/- made by lower authorities and sustained by the National Faceless Appeal Centre. This addition pertained to the assessee's investment/payments to Shri M/s Shri Parasram Commodity, treated as undisclosed income.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 10,06,000/- for investment/payments as undisclosed income was justified. Whether relief should be granted to the assessee considering their financial transactions and socio-economic status.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Arora, Adv

For Respondent: Shri Siddharth B.S. Meena, Sr. DR

Hearing: 19.12.2024Pronounced: 19.12.2024

O R D E R

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM:

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016-17 arises against National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065688241(1), dated 18.06.2024, in case no. CIT(A), Delhi-14/10270/2018-19, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing that both the lower authorities have made and sustained addition of Rs. 10,06,000/- representing the assessee’s investment/ payments made to one Shri M/s Shri Parasram Commodity, as undisclosed income.

Learned counsel appearing for the assessee invites the tribunal’s attention to pages 35 & 37 of the appeal file indicating it to have availed business loans of Rs. 7,30,000/- on 24.09.2016 followed by repayment of Rs. 7,03,000/- to foregoing entity(ies) by cheque(s) only. This is indeed coupled with the fact that keeping in mind the assessee’s socio economic status, past savings, cash withdrawals etc. also could not be altogether be ruled out. Faced with this situation I deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to delete the impugned addition of Rs. 10,06,000/- to the extent of Rs. 9.06 lakhs and affirm the remaining sum of Rs. 1 lakh. Necessary computation shall follow as per law. The assessee gets relief of Rs. 9.06 lakhs in other words.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 19.12.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →