This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Mere cash deposits not constitutes turnover for Section 44AB Audit: ITAT Delhi
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Mohd Javed Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Related Assessment Year
- 2017-18
- Courts
- All ITAT, ITAT Delhi
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Mohd Javed Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
In Mohd Javed vs. Income Tax Officer (ITO), the Delhi ITAT addressed an appeal concerning a penalty under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act, imposed due to unreported turnover. Javed, a commission agent for the Gujarat Milk Cooperative Federation, reported a nominal turnover of ₹4.01 lakh in his tax return, while cash deposits of ₹4.3 crore appeared in his bank account. The revenue authorities treated these deposits as turnover, thereby requiring an audit under Section 44AB, and subsequently imposed a penalty for non-compliance. Javed contended that the cash...
