https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77961 The ITAT Chennai considered a case involving a Best Judgment Assessment conducted u/s. 144 due to the assessee's failure to file a return within the specified time u/s. 142(1). The AO treated the return as 'invalid' and proceeded with the assessment. The intimation u/s. 143(1) by CPC, Bangalore did not regularize the return, as the AO explicitly deemed it invalid. The assessment without a notice u/s. 143(2) was upheld as valid. Regarding cash deposits during demonetization, the assessee failed to provide sufficient explanation, leading to confirmation of the addition. Profit rate determination at 8% on total turnover was upheld due to lack of evidence or explanation. The appeal on these issues was dismissed. en-us Thu, 30 May 2024 12:08:59 +0530 Thu, 30 May 2024 12:08:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77961 The ITAT Chennai considered a case involving a Best Judgment Assessment conducted u/s. 144 due to the assessee's failure to file a return within the specified time u/s. 142(1). The AO treated the return as 'invalid' and proceeded with the assessment. The intimation u/s. 143(1) by CPC, Bangalore did not regularize the return, as the AO explicitly deemed it invalid. The assessment without a notice u/s. 143(2) was upheld as valid. Regarding cash deposits during demonetization, the assessee failed to provide sufficient explanation, leading to confirmation of the addition. Profit rate determination at 8% on total turnover was upheld due to lack of evidence or explanation. The appeal on these issues was dismissed. Highlights Income Tax Thu, 30 May 2024 12:08:59 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=77961