Facts of the CaseThe assessee had not filed a return of income for the relevant
year. The Department received information that cash deposits amounting to
₹1,46,63,200 had been made in his savings bank account. Despit...
Facts of the CaseThe assessee, a civil contractor engaged in road construction
work for NHAI and other authorities, filed returns for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13
declaring income from contract receipts. During assessment p...
Facts of the CaseThe assessee initially filed a return declaring income of
₹14,49,900 and subsequently filed a revised return declaring ₹6,17,900. The
case was selected for scrutiny due to the significant reduction...
Facts of the CaseA search under section 132 was conducted on the assessee’s
premises on 27.08.2009, followed by assessments under section 153A. Additions
were made on two principal issues:
Alleged
bogus sundr...
Facts of the CaseUnder Operation “Clean Money,” the Department identified
persons who had deposited substantial cash during the demonetization period but
had not filed returns. The assessee had deposited ₹14,90,9...
Facts of the CaseThe assessee, a medical professional employed at King George’s
Medical University, originally filed a return declaring income of ₹9,48,020 and
claiming refund of excess TDS. Subsequently, on advice...
Facts of the CaseThe Revenue filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A)
deleting additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of alleged
suppression of production for Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13.The Asse...
Facts of the CaseThe Revenue filed appeals challenging the orders of the CIT(A)
which had deleted substantial additions made by the Assessing Officer on
account of alleged suppression of production in the assessee’s ...
Facts of the CaseBased on AIR information, the Department found that the
assessee had deposited ₹35,17,115 in a savings bank account but had not
originally filed a return of income for the relevant year. Reassessment...
Facts of the CaseThe assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A),
NFAC, which had arisen from a best-judgment assessment under section 144. The
appeal before the Tribunal itself was delayed by 692 days. The...