Case Law Details
Naveen Kumar Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh)
ITAT Chandigarh held that Ld. NFAC ignoring the submissions and the documents being sought to be filed as additional evidences and dismissal of assessee’s appeal without even commenting on the submissions or the documents is patently and legally wrong.
Facts-
Assessee had filed his return of income declaring taxable income of Rs. 2,34,920/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS for the reason of large value cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee was required to explain, by the AO, the source of cash deposits in the Yes Bank account amounting to Rs. 10,06,500/- and further cash deposits against credit card amounting to Rs. 1,29,000/-. Since the assessee did not file any documentary evidence nor furnished any explanation before the AO, the AO proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Act after making an addition of Rs. 11,35,500/- u/s 69A of the Act by treating the impugned cash deposits as unexplained money. The AO also invoked the provisions of section 11 5BBE of the Act for the purpose of taxing such income.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. NFAC which came to be dismissed on the ground that the assessee had not responded to the notices issued by the AO from time to time and further there was no documentary evidence on record vis-a-vis the source of cash deposits. Aggrieved, the assessee has now approached this Tribunal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
