TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate Tribunal Upholds Income Tax Assessment, Rejects Challenge on Notice Timing</h1> <h3>N.K. Chirania Versus The Income Tax Officer-2 (1), Bilaspur (C.G.)</h3> N.K. Chirania Versus The Income Tax Officer-2 (1), Bilaspur (C.G.) - TMI Issues:1. Validity of assessment framed by the A.O u/ss.147/143(3) of the Act2. Addition of Rs.5,00,000/- made u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act3. Appeal against the order of the CIT(Appeals)Issue 1: Validity of assessment framed by the A.O u/ss.147/143(3) of the Act:The appeal challenges the assessment framed by the A.O under sections 147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The contention raised is regarding the validity of the assessment due to the timing of the notice u/s.143(2) of the Act. The Ld. AR argued that the notice was issued beyond the stipulated time period. However, it was clarified that the notice was issued in compliance with the notice u/s.148, thus within the prescribed time. The claim of the Ld. AR was dismissed as misconceived, and the assessment was upheld as valid.Issue 2: Addition of Rs.5,00,000/- made u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act:The A.O reopened the case due to inconsistencies in the claim of the assessee regarding an investment of Rs.6.77 lac for purchasing flats. The assessee claimed that Rs.5 lac was sourced from cash refunds of loans given to relatives. However, the A.O rejected this claim as unsubstantiated and made an addition of Rs.5 lac u/s.69A of the Act. The Ld. AR argued that the funds were available based on bank account transactions and affidavits of relatives. The Tribunal, after examination, found the claim to be unsubstantiated, as the balance sheet and lack of documentary evidence failed to prove the utilization of cash withdrawals for the investment. Consequently, the addition made by the A.O was upheld.Issue 3: Appeal against the order of the CIT(Appeals):The assessee appealed against the order of the CIT(Appeals) sustaining the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal considered arguments from both parties and examined the evidence presented. Ultimately, the Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(Appeals) and dismissed the appeal of the assessee based on the lack of substantiated proof regarding the source of investment. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee were dismissed, and the decision of the CIT(Appeals) was upheld.This detailed analysis of the legal judgment from the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Raipur covers the issues raised, arguments presented, and the final decision rendered by the Tribunal.
TaxTMI 