Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
None appeared for the assessee nor is any application regarding removal of the deficiency in the memorandum of appeal received.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That the order of CIT(A) is against the law and facts of the case.
Harjit Singh Randhawa v. ITO 2. CIT(A) is wrong while disallowing opening cash in hand of Rs.100000 cash in hand which is from his personal statement of affair & gift from relatives.
3. CIT(A) is not justified while disallowing cash amounts to Rs.100000 as his mother mentioned that this amount is gift from her sources & attached bank statement for same.
4. CIT(A) is not justified while accepting AO addition of credit entries which are received by account payee cheques & fully explained.
CIT(A) is wrong while accepting addition made by AO for grounds other than notice issued u/s 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961.
CIT(A) fails to consider the fact that assessee is out of India & could not come to India due to some legal issues.
Any other ground which may be raised at the time of hearing.
The deficiency was informed to the assessee vide letter dated 31.05.2022 and subsequent reminder dated 10.06.2022, the appellant assessee has not removed the deficiencies and even not bothered to revise the Form 36 in the prescribed form.
In view of the deficiencies in the memorandum of appeal filed by the appellant assessee, the subject appeal is not maintainable under law in order to adjudicate the grievance of the appellant. The appeal is dismissed in limine, however, the appellant assessee shall have the right to revive the appeal on removal of the deficiencies. Thus, the appeal is rejected as defective appeal.
Harjit Singh Randhawa v. ITO Order pronounced in the open court on 27.12.2022