Latest Income-Tax Details

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

Assessee has raised four grounds but all the four grounds raised by the assessee are inter-connected, inter-related and relates to challenging the order of Ld.CIT(A) in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained investments u/s.69B of the Act.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Sec. 144 & 69 B of Income Tax Act, 1961 – Best judgment assessment – Ex-parte order valid as assessee miserably failed to explain the impugned investment before AO as well CIT(A).

Facts: Assessee was asked to explain the investments but even in spite of availing numerous opportunities, the assessee could not explain the impugned investments, thus, additions were made by AO. On further appeal, CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee. Being aggrieved, assessee went on appeal before Tribunal.

Held, that assessee miserably failed to explain the impugned investment before AO as well CIT(A). Therefore, AO as well as CIT(A) decided the orders against the assessee while making additions. No new facts or circumstances have been placed on record and the orders passed by the revenue authorities have also gone unrebutted, therefore, we find no reason to interfere into or to deviate from such findings of the authorities below and we uphold the findings of CIT(A) and reject the ground raised by the Assessee – AJAY BALDEVBHAI PATEL Vs. ITO  [2020] 80 ITR (TRIB) 367 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)