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 withdrawals exceeding Rs.47 lakh, of which only Rs.30.49 lakh was d...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a 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

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930