ITO, WARD-1, HANUMANGARH. vs. SHRI KALURAM SAHARAN, HANUMANGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 215/JODH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur19 July 2018AY 2009-102 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 Revenue's appeal. This was primarily because the tax effect of the deleted additions was below Rs. 20 lacs, as per CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 39,00,000/- made on account of cash deposit. The assessment year was 2009-10.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition on account of cash deposit, and if the appeal should be dismissed due to low tax effect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH (SMC

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA

Hearing: 18/07/2018

PER: R.C. SHARMA, AM

This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the

CIT(A), Bikaner dated 11/01/2018 for the A.Y. 2009-10 in the matter

of order u/s 147/148/143(3)of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. The grounds raised by the

revenue in appeal are reproduced as under:

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 39,00,000/- made on account of cash deposit in bank u/s 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961, especially when no details were furnished before the AO at the time of the assessment.”

2.

I have gone through the orders of authorities below and found that tax

effect in respect of additions deleted by CIT(A) is below Rs. 20 lacs, accordingly

in term of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 this appeal deserves to be

dismissed on the ground of low tax effect.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/07/2018.

Sd/- [R.C. SHARMA] Accountant Member Dated : 19/07/2018 A/N Copy to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard File (ITA No. 215/Jodh/2018) Assistant Registrar Jodhpur Bench

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →