ANURAG YADAV,KANNAUJ V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(3), KANNAUJ, UTTAR PRADESH

ITA 78/ALLD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Anurag Yadav, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which upheld the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2015-16. The assessment order included a significant addition of Rs. 1,15,45,669 under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to cash deposits in the appellant's bank account. The appellant contested various aspects of the assessment and the appellate order, including the legality of the reopening of the assessment, compliance with procedural requirements, and the substantive additions made. The Tribunal found that the principles of natural justice were not adequately followed in the lower proceedings, leading to the decision to set aside the impugned order and remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 781655 (ITAT-ALLAHABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A.K. SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: APPLICATION
• Keywords: Set aside; Reopening of assessment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 68

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH “DB”, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.78/ALLD/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Anurag Yadav Mahmoodpur Keerat, Nigoh Khas, Chhibramau Kannauj, Kannauj-209721. v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(3) Income Tax Office, Kannauj, Kannauj- 209721. PAN:ADBPY5023B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: (Application) Respondent by: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 08 09 2025 Date of pronouncement: 30 09 2025 O R D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M.: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 25.02.2025 for the assessment year 2015-16. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the appellate order upholding the assessment order dated 22.03.2023 which is unsustainable in law as the same was not made in accordance with the provisions of Section 148 of the Act and also, the reopening of assessment was not in accordance with law. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the appellate order upholding the assessment order which is liable to be set aside and quashed as the assessment order is barred by limitation, including the notice u/s 148 of the Act. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the appellate order upholding the assessment order is unsustainable in law as the provisions of Section 148A of the Act were not complied with, in true letter and spirit, accordingly, the proceedings are bad in law and thus liable to be set aside. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.78/ALLD/2025 Page 2 of 5 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the appellate order upholding the assessment order is unsustainable in law as the sanction accorded in the appellant case is bad in law as the same is not in accordance with the provisions of section 151 of the Act, as the same was issued without any application of mind. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the appellate order in sustaining the impugned additions made by the Ld. AO of Rs. 1,15,45,669 is bad in law, without assigning any reasons and without taking proper cognizance of the facts and circumstances of the case and the material/ evidence submitted by the appellant with the Ld. AO. 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts to uphold the order of the Ld. AO without considering the nature of activity carried out from past several years. 7. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts to make the impugned addition u/s 68 without rejecting the audited books of accounts. 8. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making impugned addition u/s 68 of the Act, however the same was duly accounted in and due tax already paid on the same, thus, leading to dual taxation. 9. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making impugned addition u/s 68 of the Act, without recording the opinion why the explanation as offered by the appellant was unsatisfactory. 10. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making impugned addition u/s 68 of the Act neither drawing any adverse inference in the tangible evidence/ submissions as submitted nor getting any tangible/ authentic evidence recorded to make the impugned addition. 11. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making impugned addition merely based on no receipt of confirmation from the respected parties, however the Ld. AO duly acknowledged the activity carried out by the appellant and no adverse inference was raised therein. 12.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making addition on entire deposit of Rs. 1,15,45,669 in arbitrary manner, however the profit on the same was already offered to tax. 13.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making the impugned addition however the trading result of the same was duly admitted and proceeds have already been part of the turnover, thus leading to high pitched assessment and dual taxation. 14.That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making addition of the entire credit into the bank account without extracting real or actual income which was duly depicted in the audited profit and loss account and due tax has already been paid. 15.That the order is bad in law and against the facts of the case. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.78/ALLD/2025 Page 3 of 5 16.That any other relief or reliefs deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may be granted. 17.The appellant craves leave to add, alter or vary the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 2. In this case, assessment order dated 22.03.2023 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.1,17,66,859/- as against the returned income of Rs.2,21,190/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs.1,15,45,669/- u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash deposited in bank account. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 25.02.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A). The present appeal has been filed by the assessee in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 25.02.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A). 3. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, the appeal was taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and is being disposed off on the basis of the material available on record. 4. The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) opposed the grounds of appeal and supported the orders of the lower authorities. He contended that the assessee has been thoroughly negligent and did not supply requisite information to the Assessing Officer. Hence, the order passed by the authorities below are justified. 5. Heard, the Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the material available on record. The Assessing Officer has stated Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.78/ALLD/2025 Page 4 of 5 in the assessment order that the assessee had filed certain response to the queries regarding the payments. However, before the Ld. CIT(A) there was no representation on behalf of the assessee and the Ld. CIT(A) without adverting to the grounds of appeal dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte to the assessee. Therefore, looking to the totality of the facts and the material placed before us, we are of the considered view that to sub-serve the principles of natural justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity to represent his case effectively. We, therefore, hereby set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment to the file of the Assessing Officer to make assessment afresh, after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee. The assessee would not seek any adjournment without any compelling exigency. The assessee would also co-operate in the assessment proceedings by furnishing requisite information and evidences as and when called for by the AO. Grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order was pronounced in open court on 30/09/2025 Sd/- Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] [SUBHASH MALGURIA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 30/09/2025 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.78/ALLD/2025 Page 5 of 5 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file By order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "