Dinesh Singh Chouhan v. ITO (2024] 168 taxmann.com 590 / (2025) 479 ITR 451 / (Chhattisgarh)(HC) Editorial : SLP rejected, Dinesh Singh Chouhan v ITO (2025) 479 ITR 461/ 179 taxmann.com 252 (SC)

S. 68 : Cash credits-Unexplained investment-Ex parte assessment order-Concurrent findings by authorities below that assessee failed to prove source of deposits-No substantial question of law arose. [S.69,133(6), 143(3), 144, 260A]

 Assessee failing to respond to multiple notices  Assessment completed ex parte Unexplained deposits in bank account treated as income under sections 68 and 69A Assessee remaining non-responsive during proceedings before Commissioner (Appeals) Explanation offered without substantiation that amounts were cash collected by assessee as recovery agent from its borrowers located in Naxal affected areas and deposited in his account found to be unreasonable by Tribunal Concurrent findings by authorities below that assessee failed to prove source of deposits. No substantial question of law arose. (AY.2012-13)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*