SHUBH HATCHERIES,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), JABALPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored ITA No. 22/JAB/2024 to the AO for a de novo assessment, directing the assessee to make due compliance. For ITA No. 23/JAB/2024, the penalty on addition under section 69A was restored to the AO. For ITA No. 24/JAB/2024, the penalty under section 271B was restored to the AO for a fresh decision, allowing the assessee an opportunity to explain the default.
What were the facts?
The assessee failed to file its return of income for AY 2017-18. Information was received about cash deposits of Rs. 11,30,950 during demonetization, leading to reassessment proceedings under section 147. The assessee filed a return declaring a loss but did not respond to notices for assessment and penalty proceedings. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals due to non-compliance.
What were the issues?
The appeals concerned the confirmation of additions made by the AO and upholding of penalty orders by the CIT(A) after the assessee failed to comply with notices. The assessee argued that deposits were from business receipts and sought to explain the non-compliance.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 147,Section 148,Section 139,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 271AAC(1),Section 271B,Section 115BBE,Section 44AB,Section 273B,Section 275(1A)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR
Before: SH. KUL BHARAT & SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY
PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M. These three appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A), under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 20.12.2023 (for ITA No.22/JAB/2024) and 21.12.2023 (for ITA Nos. 23 & 23/JAB/2024), in which the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
ITA No.22/JAB/2024 has been filed against the confirmation of the assessment made while ITA No. 23 & 24/JAB/2024 have been filed against the upholding of the penalty orders under section 271AAC(1) of the Act and section 271B of the Act. The grounds of appeal in these three appeals are as under:- “1. That the ld. National faceless Appeal Cen
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.
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 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026