The case between Kamal Kumar Jain and the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(5), Baraut (ITA 2238/DEL/2022) for the assessment year 2016-17 addresses complex issues regarding the applicability of Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act concerning presumptive business income and the maintenance of financial records.
Kamal Kumar Jain, the appellant, faced additions to his income for AY 2016-17 due to substantial cash deposits noticed in his bank account. The case revolves around whether these deposits should be treated as undeclared income or are justifiable under the presumptive tax provisions of Section 44AD.
The tribunal reviewed the appeals against the decisions from the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The primary focus was whether the assessee, who opted for the presumptive taxation scheme, needed to prove the source of cash deposits in his bank accounts.
The judgment discussed the non-requirement to maintain detailed books under Section 44AD and the criteria for what constitutes unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Act. The tribunal’s decision partially favored the appellant, acknowledging the legitimacy of some deposits in line with the gross receipts declared under the presumptive scheme.
This case highlights critical considerations for taxpayers who opt for presumptive taxation, especially concerning cash transactions and their impact on tax obligations. The outcome of ITA 2238/DEL/2022 serves as a significant precedent for similar cases.
In-depth Case Review: ITA 2238/DEL/2022, Kamal Kumar Jain vs. ITO, Ward-1(5), Baraut, AY 2016-17
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