INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SHILLONG, SHILLONG vs. ACHULA DARNEICHONG SAILO, SHILLONG

PDF · subscribers
ITA 120/GTY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati22 January 2025Bench: SRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)7 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by not verifying the source of cash deposits and relying on findings from a different assessment year. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside for de novo consideration.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing exemption under Section 10(26) to the assessee, a member of a scheduled tribe running a hospital in Shillong. The CIT(A) relied on previous assessment years' findings without verifying the source of substantial cash deposits made by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) correctly granted exemption under Section 10(26) without verifying the source of large cash deposits and bank transactions, and whether reliance on findings from a different assessment year was appropriate.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(26),Section 147,Section 148,Section 250,Section 44AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SRI MANOMOHAN DAS & SRI RAKESH MISHRA

order

: January 22nd, 2025 ORDER

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

More judgments on Section 10(26)

All 148 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(26) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →