SANJIV KUMAR GUPTA ,FIROZABAD vs. ITO 2(2)(4), FIROZABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 30/AGR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 April 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the assessment order and the FAA's order, restoring the matter to the FAA for a fresh assessment after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The assessee was directed to represent their case before the FAA.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed against ex-parte orders of the FAA, which dismissed the appeals for non-compliance. The Assessing Officer had made additions based on bank deposit information and ITS data.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from participating in the assessment proceedings and whether the matter should be remanded for de novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ AGRA

Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Respondent: Shri Shailender Srivastava, Sr. DR
Hearing: 02.04.2025Pronounced: 02.04.2025

the assessment order. No compliance was made during the assessment proceedings. Further, during the assessment proceedings, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.95,21,200/- and there were other credit entries appearing in the bank account amounting to Rs.36,01,2019/- totalling to Rs.1,31,22,419/-. The Assessing Officer treated the cash deposits of Rs.19,62,500/- during the demonetization period as unexplained money u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. In respect of balance credit entries amounting to Rs.1,11,59,919/-, (Rs.1,31,22,419/- - Rs.19,62,500/-) the Assessing Officer treated an amount equal to 8% of total credits as net profit and added a sum of Rs.8,92,794/-to the total income of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte of the assessee.

10.

Ground No.3 raised in is similar to ground no.3 raised in decided by us in earlier part of this order. Therefore, our above decision would apply mutatis-mutandis to this ground of the appeal. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

11.

Finally, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 2nd April, 2025.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →