BALRAJ SINGH,SONIPAT V. ITO, WARD 1, SONIPAT, SONIPAT

ITA 4002/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Balraj Singh, operating as M/s Mother Dairy Milk Agency, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi. The appeal arose from an earlier order passed by the ITO, Ward-1, Sonepat under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issue was the non-appearance of the assessee at earlier stages to defend the cash deposits during the demonetization period. The assessee argued that the transactions were related to the sale of stocks, which could be verified. The ITAT found it appropriate to remand the case back to the AO for a detailed examination of the evidence to substantiate the source of the transactions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783016 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESTA
• Assessee Lawyers: NAVEEN GUPTA
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4002/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Balraj Singh, M/s Mother Dairy Milk Agency, Near Annapurna Shopping Plaza, Meham Road, Gohana, Distt. Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana. PAN: BJXPS0778Q Vs ITO, Ward-1, Sonipat. (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee by : Shri Naveen Gupta, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.10.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12.10.2023 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No.CIT(A), Rohtak/11204/2019-20 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 25.12.2019 passed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward-1, Sonepat (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4002/Del/2025 2 2. At the outset, the ld. AR has pointed out about the delay in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal running into 536 days for which an application for condonation along with the affidavit have been filed on the basis that there was no physical service of the order. Considering that the assessee is an individual who has shown his income to be on the basis of running a dairy business, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 3. Further, we find that before the ld.CIT(A) and also before the AO the assessee has failed to appear and defend the deposit of cash during the demonetization period for which it is submitted by the assessee that being a Mother Dairy milk agency operator the amounts credited and debited are all out of the stocks sold which may be verified. 4. In the light of the aforesaid, we consider it an appropriate case to restore the issue to the files of the AO to give the assessee an opportunity for filing relevant evidences explaining the source of transactions and pass an order afresh. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.10.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 28th October, 2025. dk Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4002/Del/2025 3 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "