SUSHIL KUMAR,NARSINGHPUR vs. ITO, WARD, NARSINGHPUR, NARSINGHPUR

ITA 20/JAB/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI, NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not properly adjudicated the grounds raised by the assessee and had passed a non-speaking order. The assessee was also deprived of an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited Rs. 13,38,000/- in cash during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer made an addition of this amount as unexplained money and assessed income under Section 144. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without proper adjudication and providing an opportunity of being heard. Whether the addition of Rs. 13,38,000/- as unexplained money was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH “DB”, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI, NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 02.11.2023 pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the impugned order of addition made by the Ld. AO under the Assessment proceedings.

2.

That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing the order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard.

3.

That the Ld. CIT(A) erred issuing three notices in the month of September 2023 and rejected the appeal whereas the appeal was file

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →