NARENDER SINGH,VILLAGE LOWA KHURD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3934/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 January 2025AY 2012-2013Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessee is covered under Section 44AE of the Act, the cash deposits should be considered as his business income. The Assessing Officer was directed to frame consequential proceedings accordingly.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a transporter and fleet owner, had cash deposits of Rs. 15,13,640 added to his income during reassessment proceedings. The assessee argued these deposits represented his business income under the presumptive assessment scheme.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits made by a transporter covered under Section 44AE of the Income Tax Act represent business income and should not be added as unexplained cash credits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 44AE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Adv. &
Hearing: 02.01.2025Pronounced: 02.01.2025

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066474358(1) dated 08.07.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Coming straightaway to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal that both the learned lower authorities herein have erred in law and on fact in adding his cash deposits of Rs.15,13,640/- in the course of assessment framed on 03.12.2019 as upheld in the lower appellate discussion, it emerges during the course of hearing that he in fact is a transporter/fleet owner owning four commercial prescribed vehicle (page 5 to 13 of the paper book) and Narender Singh therefore, once he is covered under the presumptive assessment scheme u/s 44AE of the Act, the only inference which could be drawn is that these cash deposits represents his business income. I accordingly direct the learned Assessing Officer to frame his consequential proceedings as per law in very terms.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 02/01/2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →