MANI MUNJAL ,BIDHAN NAGAR vs. ITO-1(2), DURGAPUR, DURGAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 606/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 January 2024AY 2012-13Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg (Judicial Member), Shri Girish Agrawal (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the CIT(A)'s order lacked any reasoning or findings, it was not a valid order. The matter was therefore restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh, reasoned decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order. The CIT(A)'s order was found to be devoid of any discussion or findings, containing only a title and seal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)'s order was valid when it lacked any discussion or findings. The assessee also raised an issue regarding the addition of whole deposits instead of peak balance of an undisclosed bank account.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

order : January 31, 2024 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28.06.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 11, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal:

1. Instead of taking peak balance of undisclosed bank account whole of the deposits made during the year has been added as income. Hence appeal. Your Honor requested to consider the peak balance theory and provide the necessary relief.”

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →