ASSPS6238G,NOIDA V. AO, DELHI

ITA 3270/DEL/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the assessee, Ravinder Singh, against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which pertained to the assessment year 2014-15. The primary contention was regarding the adjustments made to the total income of the assessee, which included an addition of INR 1,16,51,280 to the total income and INR 5,30,581 as unexplained credit card expenses. The reassessment was initiated under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to non-filing of the return of income and the presence of large financial transactions. The Tribunal found discrepancies between the income reported in Form No. 16 and Form 26AS, leading to the decision to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a detailed examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 791154 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANKUSH KALRA
• Assessee Lawyers: NRING CHAMWIBO ZELLANG
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reassessment proceedings; TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 147; 234B

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3270/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2014-15] Ravinder Singh Vs. The I.T.O A-98, Sector – 23, Ward – 30(1) Noida, Uttar Pradesh New Delhi PAN – ASSPS 6238 G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nring Chamwibo Zellang, Adv Shri Niranjan Marda, Adv Shri Rajat Bansal, CA Department By : Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 18.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 18.11.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 24.03.2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3270/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2014-15] Ravinder Singh Vs. ITO Page 2 of 6 “Ground 1: The Ld. CIT(Appeal) erred on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law in making adjustment of 1 INR 1,16,51,280 to the total income of the Appellant without any proper basis and appreciation of the facts and circumstances of the case. Ground 2: The Ld. CIT(A)/AO erred in undertaking reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Ground 3: Without prejudice, The Ld. CIT(A)/AO failed to 3 undertake the analysis with Form 16 filed by the Companies crediting the salaries to the Appellant Ground 4: Ld. CIT(A)/AO failed to appreciate the fact that the 4 Appellant is a high salary individual and incurring credit card expenses of INR 530,581 is not a concealment of income Ground 5: That on the facts and in law, the present order needs 5 to be discarded and a fresh analysis for computing the taxable income should be considered Ground 6: The Ld. AO erred in charging interest under Section 234A, 234B and 234C. Ground 7: The Ld. AO has erred in law, facts and circumstances 7 in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c). The above grounds of appeal are mutually exclusive of and without prejudice to each another. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and/or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of the appeal. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3270/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2014-15] Ravinder Singh Vs. ITO Page 3 of 6 3. Brief facts of the case are that as per e-filing portal of the department, the assessee has not filed Return of income for the A.Y. under consideration. The name of the assessee appeared in the list of cases where huge financial transactions were made and the ITR for the relevant period was not furnished by the assessee. Keeping in view the huge financial transactions undertaken by the assessee and having not filed ROI for the relevant period, the reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short] was initiated by forming a belief that income has escaped assessment. 4. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 5,30,581/- on account of unexplained source of income for credit card expense and Rs. 1,16,51,280/- on account of receipt of salary. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who made adjustment of Rs. 1,16,51,280/- to the total income of the assessee and Rs. 5,30,581/- being credit card expenses. 6. Now the further aggrieved assessee is in appeal before us. 7. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming adjustment of Rs. 1,16,51,280/- to the total income of the assessee whereas the assessee had earned a salary of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3270/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2014-15] Ravinder Singh Vs. ITO Page 4 of 6 Rs 96,17,602/- only. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(A)/AO failed to undertake the analysis of Form 16 filed by the company crediting the salaries to the assessee with Form 26AS. The ld. counsel for the assessee continued by saying that the ld. CIT(A)/AO failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee is a highly paid salaried individual and incurring credit card expenses of Rs 5,30,581/- is within the means of the salary drawn by the assessee. 8. The ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently stated that Part A of Form 16 shows more income and hence the Assessing Officer made the addition. He, therefore, prayed that Part B of Form 16 be examined afresh and TDS deductions may be compared. 9. Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 10. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that there is mismatch in income that is reflected in Form No. 16 and 26AS. In view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered view that the matter be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to verify the income as per Form No. 16 and 26AS and Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3270/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2014-15] Ravinder Singh Vs. ITO Page 5 of 6 decide the issues afresh after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to provide necessary information /documents as required by the authorities and co-operate in adjudication of the issues at hand. 11. On the issue of card expense, we are of the view that a person earning a salary of Rs 96 lakh a year is well within his means to expend 5 lakh on credit card. Ground 4 is allowed. 12. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 3270/DEL/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 18.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 08th DECEMBER, 2025. VL/ Copy forwarded to: 1. Assessee 2. Respondent 3. CIT Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3270/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2014-15] Ravinder Singh Vs. ITO Page 6 of 6 4. CIT(A) Asst. Registrar, 5. DR ITAT, New Delhi Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order 2. Date on which the typed draft order is placed before the Dictating Member 3. Date on which the typed draft order is placed before the other Member [in case of DB] 4. Date on which the approved draft order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Order is placed before the Dictating Member for sign 6. Date on which the fair order is placed before the other Member for sign [in case of DB] 7. Date on which the Order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S for uploading on ITAT website 8. Date of uploading, inf not, reason for not uploading 9. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 10. Date on which the file goes for Xerox 11. Date on which the file goes for endorsement 12. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 13. Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 14. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section for dispatch the Tribunal order 15. Date of Dispatch of the Order 16. Date on which the file goes to the Record Room after dispatch the order Printed from counselvise.com "