BHUSHAN KUMAR,KHANAURI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SUNAM, SANGRUR

ITA 931/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Bhushan Kumar, the proprietor of M/s Garg Motors, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the initiation of proceedings under section 147 and the issuance of notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on information from another Income Tax Officer without concrete evidence of income escapement. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution without considering the merits, which led to the current appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not adequately addressed the grounds of appeal and thus remanded the case for a thorough examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785535 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 20-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEL VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEPAK ANAND
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 931/CHD/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhushan Kuymar, Prop M/s Garg Motors, Narwana Road, Garhi HO Khanauri 148027 बनाम Vs. The ITO, Sunam èथायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: AKTPK0449E अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent ( PHYSICAL HEARING ) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Deepak Anand (Advocate) राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivel Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 28.10.2025 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Laliet Kumar, AM: Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.06.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: 1. That the order of Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax-11 (Appeals) and National Printed from counselvise.com 931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 2 Faceless Assessment Centre is against law & facts. 2. That the Officer was not justified to initiate proceedings u/s 147 on the basis of information from Income Tax Officer ward- 28(1) Delhi and was not justified to issue notice u/s 148 of Income Tax Act without any material on record to establish the quantum of escapement. The escaped income is purely based on cash deposit which does not come into purview of escapement amount without any concrete evidence on record. 3. That Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was erred in law to dismiss appeal only on ground of non-attendance appellant 3 proceedings without considering the merit of case. The Commission of Income Tax (Appeals) just accepted the finding without any independent enquiry of fact of case. 4. That the Officer of National Faceless Assessment Centre passed the order u/s 147 read with section 144B without complying the specific provisions with regard to issue of show cause notice and draft order. No response to show cause considered during the assessment proceedings. 5. That notice u/s 148 was wrongly issued with regard to quantum of escapement. The information received pertains to escaped amount of Rs.88,50,000.00 (1,08,70,00,00- 20,20,000.00) 5 whereas total cash deposit assessed as income of Rs.63,39,590.00 which includes Rs.20,20,000.00 as cash Printed from counselvise.com 931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 3 deposit during specified period. So the alleged escapement amount as per facts is wrongly determined. 6. That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) & Officer of National Faceless Assessment Centre was not Justified to assess the alleged amount w/s 69A without considering his own finding of \"unexplained in books of account\". The provision of section 69A was wrongly invoked as all entries are duly recorded in books of accounts. 7. That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified to sustain the addition without concluding the facts of deposit and withdrawals in books of account. That all entries 7 pertain to business of appellant. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) even did not consider the cash flow of cash deposit entries which was duly filed during the course of assessment proceedings. 8. That Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified to sustain addition without rejecting books of account U/s 145(3) of Income Tax Act 1961. No addition is called for without rejection of books. 9. That the appellant craves leave to add OR amend any ground of 9 appeal before the appeal is heard OR dispose off. Printed from counselvise.com 931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 4 3. At the very outset, ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted before the Bench that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. 4. Per contra, Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the Assessee for non- prosecution. We are of this considered view that even where the Assessee does not comply to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) should have passed the order on merit on the basis of material available on record. But in the present case, he has confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer without giving his own view and even without adjudicating the different grounds of appeal filed by the Assessee. Therefore, in the fitness of things and keeping in view the natural justice to the Assessee, we are inclined to remand this case back to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merit. Printed from counselvise.com 931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 5 6. In view of this, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say, that the ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present his case and to furnish necessary evidences and details. The Assessee is also directed to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when called for and will not contribute in unnecessary delay in the hearing of the appeal. 8. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 31.10.2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( KRINWANT SAHAY) ( LALIET KUMAR) Accountant Member Judicial Member “आर.क े.” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "