SMT. ARUNA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(2), BANGALORE

ITA 537/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 April 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee failed to prove the source of the deposits with evidence, particularly the ownership of tractors and the genuineness of loan transactions. The assessee's plea for presumptive taxation under Section 44AE was rejected due to non-compliance and lack of evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file an income tax return for AY 2017-18, and the Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 18,30,591/- on account of unexplained cash deposits in her bank account. The assessee claimed the deposits were from tractor hiring business and loans, but failed to provide supporting evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits in a bank account can be treated as unexplained income when the assessee fails to provide evidence of their source, and if presumptive taxation provisions apply in such cases.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 44AE,Section 68,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Appellant: Shri Sukruth N. Segu, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for department
Hearing: 22.04.2024Pronounced: 22.04.2024

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18 dated 24.1.2024. 2. In this case, assessment order was passed by the ld. AO u/s 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) without participation of assessee. The ld. AO while pursuing the records noticed that assessee has not filed return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 as per provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. Accordingly, notice u/s 142(1)(i) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 14.3.2018. The same was duly served on the assessee. However, the a

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 139(1)

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →