Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Attachment on Cash Credit of Assessee under GST Act: Delhi HC directs Bank to Comply Instructions to Vacate
 Income Tax Addition Made Towards Unsubstantiated Share Capital Is Eligible For Section 80-IC Deduction: Delhi High Court
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA

Asif Ali Siddiqui 80/66 A, Near Block, Gurudwara Malviya Nagar, New Delhi Vs. ITO Ward-32(3) New Delhi
October, 05th 2021



ITA No.1066/Del/2020
Assessment Year: 2011-12

Asif Ali Siddiqui ITO
80/66 A, Near – Block, Vs Ward-32(3)
Gurudwara Malviya Nagar, New Delhi
New Delhi


Appellant by Sh. Jalaj Kumar Singhal,
Respondent by Advocate
Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr DR

Date of hearing: 30/09/2021
Date of Pronouncement: 04/10/2021


1. This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the
order of the CIT(A)-11, New Delhi dated 28.10.2019
pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12.
2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee
is that the CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.06 lacs,
this regarding the submissions made by the assessee.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that during the
course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings the AO was
seized with the information of cash deposit of Rs.2284500/-
in the bank account with Canara Bank. Assessee was asked
to explain the source of cash deposit. On receiving no
plausible reply the AO made the addition of Rs.2284500/-.
Proceeding further the AO noticed that as per Form No. 26AS
the assessee has received professional technical receipts of
Rs.202500/-from Indian Council of Social Science and
Research during the year under consideration. Since this
income was not reflected in the return of income and infact
the assessee has not filed any return of income for the year
under consideration. The AO made the addition of
Rs.202500/- making total addition of Rs.2487000/-.
4. Assessee strongly agitated the matter before the CIT(A)
and contended that the AO has not considered the returned
income as per the return filed pursuant to the notice u/s.
148 of the Act. It was explained to the CIT(A) that the
assessee was earlier working with Indian Council of Social
Science and Research, Government of India and after
retirement has been practicising as Doctor from which he
received cash of Rs.1152635/-on account of private practice.
The CIT(A) was convinced with this reply of the assessee and
deleted the addition to the extent of Rs.1152635/-. The

CIT(A) further deleted Rs.1 lac considering it to be out of past
saving and gifts. Addition to the extent of Rs.1352635/- was
deleted and the balance amount of Rs.931865/- was

5. Before me the counsel reiterated what has been stated
before the CIT(A). It is the say of the counsel that the CIT(A)
erred in accepting only Rs. 1 lac out of past savings when the
assessee is practicing since last 25 years. The counsel further
pointed out that Rs.6 lacs were received as gift from friends
and relatives which have not been accepted by the CIT(A).
The DR strongly supported the order of the CIT(A).
6. I have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of
the authorities below. The assessee was earlier employed
with the Government of India working with Indian Council of
Social Science & Research. Yet the Counsel pleaded the
ignorance of the assessee in so far as the income tax act is
concerned. By any stretch of imagination this contention
cannot be accepted. Further I find that the first appellate
authority has accepted the profession receipts as the source
of cash deposit to the extent of Rs.1152635/-and further
accepted Rs. 1 lacs out of past savings and petty gifts.

7. I find that the order of the CIT(A) is very judicious on the
facts of the case in hand and, therefore, I decline to interfere
with the findings of the CIT(A).

8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

Order pronounced in the open court on 04.10.2021.

*NEHA* Sd/-
Date:-04.10.2021 ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Copy forwarded to: ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
1. Appellant

2. Respondent

3. CIT

4. CIT(Appeals)


Date of dictation 30.09.2021
Date on which the typed draft is placed 04.10.2021
before the dictating Member 04.10.2021
Date on which the typed draft is placed 04.10.2021
before the Other member 04.10.2021
Date on which the approved draft comes to 04.10.2021
the Sr.PS/PS 04.10.2021
Date on which the fair order is placed before 04.10.2021
the Dictating Member for Pronouncement
Date on which the fair order comes back to
the Sr. PS/ PS
Date on which the final order is uploaded
on the website of ITAT
Date on which the file goes to the Bench
Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
The date on which file goes to the Assistant
Registrar for signature on the order
Date of dispatch of the Order

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting