GAJANAND VITHOBA BANKAR,SOLAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, PANDHARPUR, PANDHARPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 992/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 August 2024AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI S.S. GODARA (Judicial Member)9 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and restored the issue to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessee was granted one final opportunity to substantiate their case due to notices being sent to an incorrect email address.

What were the facts?

During a search operation, the Assessing Officer (AO) found significant cash deposits and loan repayments in the assessee's bank account. The AO treated these as unexplained income and made additions under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made by the AO under Section 69A were justified, and whether the CIT(A)/NFAC erred in passing ex-parte orders without proper notice service.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 144(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI S.S. GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P Bora
For Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to:

1. 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 2.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →