ARUN RAJPUT,DELHI V. ITO, WARD-45(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 1406/DEL/2023

AI Insights

Arun Rajput appealed against the order of the CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which confirmed the addition of Rs. 45,23,500 to his income for the Assessment Year 2017-18. This addition was initially made by the ITO under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account during the demonetization period. The Tribunal decided the appeal based on the material available on record and the arguments presented by the Ld. Departmental Representative, as the assessee failed to appear or substantiate his case at multiple hearings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 22958 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 04-05-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIRENDER SINGH
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 1406/Del/2023 Arun Rajput Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1406/Del/2023, (A.Y.2017-18) Arun Rajput B-487-488, Khyala Colony, Delhi PAN No: ADVPR1679L Vs. ITO Ward-45(3) New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Virender Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement 25/10/2024 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM : This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld.CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [“NFAC” for short], dated 09/03/2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of Appeal are as under: - “1. The Ld. ITO has erred in law and on facts in raising demand of Rs.47,02,703/- by making an addition of Rs 45,23,500/- u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without analyzing the facts. The Order passed by the Ld. ITO is arbitrary, unlawful and against the cannons of natural justice. Grounds of Appeal (I)Making an addition of Rs 45,23,500/- on account Cash deposited. 2 ITA No. 1406/Del/2023 Arun Rajput Vs. ITO The Ld. ITO has arbitrarily made an addition of Rs.45,23,500/- without Considering the exact facts of the case that despite detail submission was made manually as well as online through our e filing portal. Addition of Rs 45,23,500/- made vide order is absolutely wrong because Ld. ITO has not at all gone through the details of source of cash generated submitted by us and for further reference the same are already available with Ld. Assessing Officer and we will again submit at the time of hearing. This is purely unjustified, unlawful and against the principles of Audi Alteram partem and natural justice and it is prayed do be deleted fully.” 3. None appeared for the Assessee even after service of the notice, on a previous occasion, the Assessee's Representative filed an adjournment application, accordingly an adjournment has been granted on 10/10/2023, thereafter, four hearing notices were issued, neither the Assessee nor the representative of the Assessee have appeared before the Tribunal at any hearing dates. In view of the above, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative and verifying the material available on record. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 25/12/2019 by making an addition of Rs. 45,23,500/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). As against the assessment order dated 25/12/2019, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 3 ITA No. 1406/Del/2023 Arun Rajput Vs. ITO 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the Assessee has deposited the cash of Rs. 45,23,500/- during the demonetization period and the Assessee has failed to substantiate the source of the cash deposited into the bank account, therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition made by the A.O., thus sought for dismissal of the Appeal of the Assessee. 6. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The Assessee was asked to substantiate the source of cash deposit before the A.O. as well as before the CIT(A), which could not be substantiated by the Assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the Appeal has adjudicated the issues on its merit. The Assessee is absent before the Tribunal and the findings and the conclusions of the Lower Authorities have not been controverted by the Assessee. Thus, we find no merit in the Grounds of appeal of the Assessee, accordingly, the Grounds of appeal of the Assessee are dismissed, consequentially the Appeal filed by the Assessee is also dismissed. Order pronounced in open Court on 25th October, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 25/10/2024 R.N, Sr. PS 4 ITA No. 1406/Del/2023 Arun Rajput Vs. ITO Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "