High Court held that order since the assessee had failed to satisfactorily explain source of cash deposit made by it in its ‘PN’ bank account and said cash deposit was not adjudicated upon during original scrutiny proceedings. The reassessment notice was justified. SLP dismissed.(AY. 2017-18)
Sunil Jain v. ITD (2023) 459 ITR 276 /295 Taxman 10(SC) Editorial: Sunil Jain v.. ITD (2022) 289 Taxman 688/ 20 ITR-OL409 (Delhi)(HC)
S. 147 : Reassessment-Unexplained money-Limited scrutiny-Cash deposit-Demonetisation-Pendency of appeal-Not adjudicated in the original assessment proceedings-Reassessment notice is valid.[S. 69A, 148, Art. 136]