M/S ADIM JATI SEVA SAHKARI SAMITI, MARYADIT, KORBA,KORBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2, KORBA, KORBA

ITA 50/RPR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 September 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)19 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Appeals) had not dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution but had decided it on merits due to lack of evidence from the assessee. The Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's grounds of appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee society failed to file its return of income and did not comply with notices from the Assessing Officer (AO) and Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals). The AO made an addition of Rs. 2,47,65,369/- on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits, and whether the addition on account of unexplained cash deposits was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 139,Section 142(1),Section 133(6),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI RAVISH SOOD & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CA
For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Hearing: 14.09.2023Pronounced: 18.09.2023

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 14.12.2022, which arises from the order passed by the AO under Sec. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 11.12.2019 for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal before us:

“Ground No. I : 1.

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 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →