Case Number: ITA 59/DEL/2021
Appellant: Jagbir Singh Pawaria, Rohtak
Respondent: ITO Ward – 1, Rohtak
Assessment Year: 2011-12
Case Filed on: 2021-01-29
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2022-04-26
Pronounced on: 2022-04-26
In the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi “SMC” Bench, New Delhi, a significant case was presented involving Jagbir Singh Pawaria. The primary issues under dispute were the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of cash deposits in bank accounts, savings bank interest, and the classification of agricultural income. The appellant challenged these additions, leading to the filing of this appeal.
The appellant, Jagbir Singh Pawaria, filed his return of income on 14.07.2011, declaring an income of Rs.1,12,290 under the head “Salary” and Rs.5,17,560 from agricultural income. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment, and the AO made additions amounting to Rs.18,00,000 on account of cash deposits in bank accounts and Rs.31,945 as interest on these deposits. Consequently, the AO computed the total income at Rs.19,44,235 against the declared income of Rs.1,12,290.
The appellant challenged the AO’s decision on the following grounds:
The appellant’s counsel, Shri Naveen Gupta, argued that the additions were arbitrary and unjustified. He contended that the authorities failed to consider the deposits and withdrawals in the bank accounts and did not properly evaluate the additional evidence provided. He also argued that the addition under section 68 was illegal, as the appellant did not maintain any books of accounts and had only salary income.
The respondent, represented by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR, supported the orders of the authorities below and opposed the appellant’s submissions.
The Tribunal, represented by Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member, analyzed the case and the relevant legal precedents. Key observations and findings included:
The Tribunal ruled partially in favor of the appellant, restoring the issues of cash deposits and agricultural income to the AO for fresh adjudication while upholding the addition of savings bank interest. The appeal ITA No. 59/DEL/2021 was thus partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Final Judgment: The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
This case highlights the importance of thorough verification of evidence and the adherence to principles of natural justice in tax dispute resolutions.
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