Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Satendra Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.

Satendra Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Assessee, a civil contractor, deposited Rs.30.49 lakh in SBNs during demonetization. AO made addition of entire cash deposit of Rs.31.38 lakh u/s 68, rejecting explanation that deposits were sourced from cash withdrawals by Assessee & his son, both engaged in construction business.

CIT(A) held that withdrawals made months earlier could not be treated as kept idle till November 2016 & confirmed addition.

Before Tribunal, Assessee produced complete bank statements showing aggregate cash withdra

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Recorded Sales Cannot Be Taxed Again U/s 68; Additions Based Only on Third-Party Statement Deleted On-Money Addition for Flat Purchase Deleted; Builder’s General Statement Alone Not Enough Bogus Purchase Cases: Only Profit Element Taxable; 4% GP Addition Upheld Assessment on Amalgamated Company Held Void for Lack of Jurisdiction Penalty for Non-Compliance Deleted as Venial Breach Where Assessments Accepted Returned Income View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
January 2026
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031