ABHISHEK BANTA,HARIDWAR V. ITAT, DEHRADUN

ITA 44/DDN/2026

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Abhishek Banta against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which upheld the AO's addition of INR 14,77,000 to the assessee's income, citing unexplained sources of bank deposits. The reassessment proceedings were initiated under sections 147 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following a notice under section 148, which was later treated as a notice under section 148A(b) due to a Supreme Court judgment. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had not adequately addressed the assessee's submissions and failed to conduct necessary inquiries regarding the lenders of the disputed amounts.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 847796 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Dehradun
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2026
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India vs Ashish Agarwal, Rajiv Bansal vs 301 Taxman 238 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: MRINALI SHARMA
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 148; 131

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN “SMC” BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.44/DDN/2026 [Assessment Year : 2016-17] Abhishek Banta 1, Near Hotel Rama Krishna, Haridwar Railway Road, Haridwar, Uttarakhand -249401. PAN-AINPB777304D vs ITAT, Dehradun Camp Bench, Dehradun Uttarakhand APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Ms. Mrinali Sharma Respondent by Ms. Poonam Sharma, CIT DR Date of Hearing 12.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 25.03.2026 ORDER PER BENCH: The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 12.11.2025 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. NFAC/2015-16/10295647 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order dated 19.05.2023 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and in the case of assessee, reassessment proceedings were initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act dt. 29.06.2021 which in terms of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 44/DDN/2026 Page | 2 the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs Ashish Agarwal vide order dated 04.05.2022 was treated as notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act and thereafter, the information available with the AO was supplied to the assessee. After receiving the reply of the assessee, order u/s 148A(d) of the Act was passed and fresh notice u/s 148 was issued. The AO observed that assessee received INR 14,77,000/- in its bank accounts and source of the same remained unexplained. Therefore, inquiry was made and it is found that this amount was received by the assessee from two persons namely, Shri Sunil Kumar and Shri Pallav Kumar. Since, the assessee has failed to furnish all the details of these parties and there were certain other deposits, the source of which remained unexplained. Therefore, the AO made the addition of INR 14,77,000/- towards bank deposits and further addition of INR 40,957/- was made on account of income declared towards from business activities. In first appeal before Ld. CIT(A), assessee filed additional evidences U/R 46A which though were admitted however, were dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) without providing any reason as to why such evidences were not accepted as applicable to the facts of the present case. 3. Heard the contentions of both parties and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(A), it is observed that assessee has received loan of INR 10 Lakhs from one Shri Sunil Kumar and it was submitted that he had expired and his legal Heirs are not cooperating with assessee and are not providing relevant details therefore, a request was made for the issue of summons u/s 131 of the Act for which assessee provided complete Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 44/DDN/2026 Page | 3 address and PAN of legal heir. Regarding the other lender, Shri Pallav Kumar from whom the assessee had taken loan of INR 14,77,000/-, assessee provided complete address and requested for the issue of summons u/s 131 of the Act. It is observed that despite of providing relevant details, lower authorities failed to make any independent enquiries nor any summons were issued to any of the party. Regarding the excess deposits of INR 40,957/-, the assessee filed VAT returns etc. however, they have not been appreciated by the AO. 4. In the light of these facts, we set aside both orders of the lower authorities and restore the matter back to the file of AO with the direction to make necessary inquiries from the lenders of whom all the details were provided by the assessee and further directed to examine VAT returns of the assessee to verify the source of bank deposits of the remaining amounts. The assessee is also directed to participate in set aside proceedings and to file all the details required to substantiate its claim before the AO. AO is further directed to examine the validity of the assessment order in view of the directions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajiv Bansal reported in 301 Taxman 238 (SC) for calculating the surviving period for passing the order passed u/s 148A(d) and issue of notice u/s 148 since the assessee has also challenged the validity of the re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act however, relevant dates were not provided to us. 5. With these directions, all the Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 44/DDN/2026 Page | 4 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.03.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) JUDICIAL MEMBER Date-25.03.2026 *Amit Kumar, Sr.P.S* (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT 6. Guard File ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI (Dehradun Circuit Bench, Dehradun) Printed from counselvise.com "