This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the ITA 198/DEL/2019 case involving Paramjit Singh Soni and the Income Tax Officer, Ward-33(4), New Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2013-14.
Paramjit Singh Soni appealed against the decision of the Ld. CIT(A)-11, New Delhi, which confirmed an addition of Rs.13,65,958 as unexplained interest income from M/s. Good Earth Eco Development Pvt. Ltd. as shown in Form 26AS.
The case centered on the addition of Rs.13,65,958 as interest income that was not declared by the assessee in his tax return but was documented in Form 26AS with TDS deducted. The assessee contended that the interest income did not belong to him and submitted an affidavit and bank statements as evidence, which were not found sufficient by the AO and the CIT(A).
During the tribunal hearing, the burden of proof was considered to lie with the assessee to disprove the entries in Form 26AS. The tribunal noted the absence of any steps taken by the assessee to rectify the Form 26AS or to formally object to the entries with the tax authorities. The tribunal upheld the addition citing the assessee’s failure to convincingly refute the presumed ownership of the interest income.
The tribunal dismissed the appeal, highlighting the importance of proactive measures by taxpayers when discrepancies in tax records arise. This case illustrates the challenges in disputing tax authority claims when documentary evidence is deemed insufficient.
Detailed Case Review of ITA 198/DEL/2019: Paramjit Singh Soni vs. ITO, Ward-33(4), New Delhi
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform