DEEPAKKUMAR RADHESHYAM SHRIVASTAV,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 629/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Deepakkumar Radheshyam Shrivastav against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding unexplained cash deposits and non-cash credit entries in the bank. The Assessing Officer had initially made these additions ex-parte under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to the non-compliance of the assessee in filing returns or responding to notices. The Tribunal, considering the additional evidences and affidavit submitted by the assessee during the appeal, decided to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for substantial justice and a fair opportunity for the assessee to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708160 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAMAL DEEP SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: PRITESH SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.629/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Deepakkumar Radheshyam Shrivastav, 1, Radhegranth, Near Jeeviba Complex, Cadila Crossing Road, Ghodasar, Ahmedabad-380050. [PAN :BBDPS 7889 G] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Pritesh Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Kamal Deep Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 17.07.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 10.02.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as \"CIT(A)\" for short), passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as \"the Act\" for short) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals: (1) The Learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in not condoning the delay in filing of the appeal, such delay is requested to be condoned. (2) The learned CIT(A), MFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of cash deposited to Bank amounting to Rs.20,67,708/- considering the same as unexplained, such addition is requested to be deleted. (3) The learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of non cash credit entries in Bank amounting to Rs.2,44,055/- ITA No.629/Ahd/2025 Deepakkumar R Shrivastav Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2– considering the same as unexplained, such addition is requested to be deleted. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has not filed his return of income for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer, on the basis of Non Filers Monitoring System (NMS) Information / ITS (AIR), observed that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.19,91,275/- in his savings bank maintained with State Bank of India. Based on this information, the Assessing Officer formed a belief that income had escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 26.03.2018. However, the notice under section 148 and subsequent notices under section 142(1) were returned unserved. As no return was filed and no compliance was made, the Assessing Officer proceeded to frame the assessment ex-parte under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and passed the assessment order dated 22.11.2018, making an addition of Rs.23,11,763/- under the head “unexplained cash credit” under section 68 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee could not furnish the required details before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) due to the grave negligence and failure on the part of his previous Chartered Accountant. It was contended that the assessee has now engaged a new Chartered Accountant who has compiled all necessary documents and evidences. The Ld. AR also submitted a paper book containing additional evidences (page No. 65 to 107), which includes an affidavit of the assessee explaining the reasons for non-compliance, along with documentary evidence ITA No.629/Ahd/2025 Deepakkumar R Shrivastav Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 3– supporting the source of cash deposits. The Ld. AR thus urged that the matter may be remanded to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 5. The Ld. DR submitted that although these evidences are being produced for the first time before the Tribunal, the same may be considered subject to verification by the Assessing Officer. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the addition has been made ex-parte under section 144 of the Act, due to the non-compliance of the assessee at the assessment stage. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee neither filed the return of income nor responded to the statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A). However, the assessee has now furnished additional evidences before the Tribunal for the first time, accompanied by an affidavit explaining the reasons for earlier non-compliance. In view of the foregoing facts, considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the considered view that the matter deserves to be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. We accordingly set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remand the matter to the Assessing Officer with a direction to consider the additional evidences filed by the assessee and to decide the matter afresh after affording due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 17.07.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 17.07.2025 *btk ITA No.629/Ahd/2025 Deepakkumar R Shrivastav Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 4– आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 16.07.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 16.07.2025 3. Other Member 16.07.2025 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S . 16.07.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 17.07.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 17.07.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 17.07.2025 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… "