THE ITO, WARD-3(4), AHMEDABAD vs. SHRI SHABBIRALI JAMALBHAI MOMIN SHELIYA, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2908/AHD/2015Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 August 2017AY 2011-122 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Assessing Officer. This was based on the fact that the tax effect involved in the appeal was less than Rs. 10,00,000/-, as per CBDT Circular No. 21/2015.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer appealed the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 28,78,333/- made on account of unexplained cash deposited in the assessee's bank account. The addition was related to the assessment year 2011-12.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition for unexplained cash deposits. However, the appeal was dismissed on procedural grounds related to tax effect.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD

I.T.A. No.2908/Ahd/2015 Assessment Years: 2011-12 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM] I.T.A. No.2908/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, ....................…Appellant Ward – 1(3)(5), Ahmedabad. Vs. Shabbirali Jamalbhai Momin Sheliya ..........……. Respondent C/o. Hotel Paramount, Khas Bazar, Bhadra, Ahmedabad – 380 001. [PAN: AFDPS 6191 J] Appearances by: Keyur Patel for the appellant None for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing: 17.08.2017 Date of pronouncing the order: 21.08.2017 O R D E R

1.

By way of this appeal, the Assessing Officer has challenged correctness of the order dated 18th August 2015, passed by the learned CIT(A)-10, Ahmedabad for the assessment year 2011-12, on the following grounds :-

“1. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.28,78,333/- being unexplained cash deposited in bank account without appreciating the assessment order as well as the Remand Report that the assessee failed to prove the source of such deposit out of sale of land and not to admit the additional evidence. 2. On the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer to the extent mentioned above since the assessee has failed to disclose his true income/book profit. .

I.T.A. No.2908/Ahd/2015 Assessment Years: 2011-12 Page 2 of 2 3. The appellant prays that the order of CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored to the above extent.”

2.

I have noticed that the tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-. In view of this undisputed fact and in the light of CBDT Circular No.21/2015 dated 10th December, 2015, I am of the considered view that this appeal is liable to be dismissed as withdrawn for the simple reason that tax effect involved in this appeal is less than Rs.10,00,000/-.

3.

In the result, appeal is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 21st day of August 2017. Sd/- Pramod Kumar (Accountant Member) Dated: Ahmedabad, the 21st day of August, 2017. Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) Guard File By order

Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →