SONI DEVI ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 (2) JAIPUR, INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 969/JPR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 September 2024AY 2011-2012Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the sale deed for 1/4th portion of the land at Rs. 23 lacs was proved, and the findings regarding the sale consideration being Rs. 45 lacs and Rs. 22 lacs being undisclosed were set aside. However, the issue of explaining the source of Rs. 8 lacs cash payment required further examination.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- to the income of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2011-12, alleging failure to explain the source of cash payment of Rs. 8 lacs and Rs. 22,00,000/-. The assessee claimed to have purchased 1/4th portion of an immovable property for Rs. 23,00,000/-. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee has sufficiently explained the source of cash payment of Rs. 8 lacs for the purchase of immovable property.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 271F,Section 271(1)(c),Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 133(A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR

Before: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No.969/JP/2024

Hearing: 11/09/2024Pronounced: 18/09/2024

Result

21.

As a result, this appeal is partly allowed in the manner indicated above.

1.

As regards the issue of explaining of source of cash payment of Rs. 8 lacs on 15. 7.2010 towards the sale consideration for purchase of the decision afresh on this issue, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

1.

Before commencement of proceedings on remand, the assessee to produce before the Assessing Officer, receipt in proof of deposit of amount of the costs imposed.

Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to join any other concerned person in the inquiry for verification of any relevant facts.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18/09/2024.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 18/09/2024 *Ganesh Kumar, Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Soni Devi, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward -2(2), Jaipur vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 969/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →