SATBIR SINGH,SONIPAT vs. ITO WARD - 3, SONIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 999/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 June 2023AY 2012-132 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the revenue authorities had already provided deductions for all possible sources of cash deposits. Therefore, they declined to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to comply with a notice under Section 148 and did not attend hearings, leading to an ex-parte assessment. The CIT(A) granted some relief, but the assessee appealed further.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) correctly confirmed the addition for which sources of cash deposits were not proved, after considering all possible deductions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. C. M. GargDr. B. R. R. Kumar

Hearing: 27.06.2023Pronounced: 30.06.2023

ORDER

Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A), Rohtak dated 26.12.2019.

2.

The assessee was issued notice u/s 148 to file the return of income which was not complied. The assessee has also not attended the hearings before the Assessing Officer leading to conclusion of the proceedings u/s 147 determining the total income of Rs.57,13,297/-.

3.

The ld. CIT(A) has given relief of an amount of Rs.32,00,000/- in the first appellate proceedings. The assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal in March 2020. Hearings were conducted on 13.07.2022, 26.10.2022, 19.01.2023, 25.04.2023, 26.04.2023 and 27.04.2023. The notices have been duly issued

Satbir Singh to the address given in return as well as in Form 36. Notices were also issued on the E-mail on 10.11.2022, 24.01.2023, 27.01.2023, 26.04.2023 given in the Form 36 and in the return of income.

4.

Owing to the continuous non-compliance, it was decided to adjudicate the matter on merits of the case after going through the record available before us. The total deposits in the bank account of the assessee were to the tune of Rs.69,92,000/- out of which the Assessing Officer himself has given benefit of Rs.17,00,000/- and Rs.6,01,620/-. The ld. CIT(A) accorded benefit of Rs.5,00,000/- on sale of agricultural product and Rs.10,00,000/- on account of the deposits out of past savings. Thus, we find the revenue authorities have given the benefit of deduction of every possible source out of the cash deposits and confirmed only the amounts for which the sources have not been proved and hence we decline to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A).

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 30/06/2023.

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →