SMT. BIMLA DEVI,JIND, HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, JIND, JIND, HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 261/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 October 2024AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)10 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed discrepancies in bank statements and certificates provided by the assessee, noting that the figures did not match the assessee's own admission of Rs. 1.30 crores. Due to these inconsistencies and the need for a fresh examination, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order.

What were the facts?

The assessee, involved in agriculture, did not file an income tax return for AY 2011-12. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 4,81,14,500/- on account of cash deposits and property purchases after issuing notices under Section 148 and 142(1), which the assessee allegedly refused to accept. The CIT(A) reduced the addition to Rs. 59,90,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment was valid and whether the addition made by the AO and upheld to an extent by the CIT(A) was justified based on the evidence presented.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 69A,Section 253,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI,

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate &, Shri Ashok Goyal,CA
Hearing: 19.09.2024Pronounced: 30/10/2024
15.

Appeal of the assessee is allowed as and by way of remand back to the file of ld. CIT(A).

16.

Appeal allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 30/10/2024.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →