GARGI MANCHANDA,NEW DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

ITA 5280/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Gargi Manchanda against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention was the addition of Rs. 21,91,200 to the assessee's income, which was treated as unexplained cash deposits. The AO had reopened the case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, issued a notice under section 148, and subsequently made the addition after the assessee failed to comply with notices. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, rejecting the assessee's explanations regarding the source of the deposits due to insufficient documentary evidence. The Tribunal, after hearing the Departmental Representative and reviewing the records, decided to remit the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 475571 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Section: 147; 148; 69A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, ITA NO. 5280/Del/2024 A.YR. : 2012-13 Gargi Manchanda, B-358/EF Street No. 4, Majlis Park, Adarsh Nagar, Delhi – 33 (PAN: BAIPM1478D) VS. Income Tax Officer, Room No. 1601, E-2 Block Civic Centre, Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR. Date of hearing : 10.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 10.03.2025 ORDER The Assessee has filed the instant Appeal against the Order of the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi dated 28.03.2024, relating to assessment year 2012-13 on the following ground:- 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessment order passed by the AO is bad in law. 2. That having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the AO has erred in law and on facts in making addition ofRs. 21,91,200/- on account of cash deposits. 3. That the AO has erred in making an addition of Rs. 21,91,200/- on account of cash deposit in the bank of assessee. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had made cash deposits during the FY 2011-12 and the assessee had not filed ITR for the AY 2012-13 and on the basis of which the case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 and accordingly notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued. In response, the assessee filed ITR declaring a total income of 2 | P a g e Rs. 1,89,820/-. Assessee has failed to comply with the notices issued by the AO, hence, the AO treated the cash deposit of Rs. 21,91,200/- as unexplained income money from undisclosed sources and added to his income u/s. 69A of the Act and passed an exparate assessment order. In appeal, before the Ld. CIT(A) assesssee explained that the cash deposits was out of past savings and withdrawals and also from the cash receipts of the retail business. However, Ld. CIT(A), rejected the submissions on the ground that requisite documentary evidence was not produced. Against the aforesaid action of the ld. CIT(A) assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite issue of notice for hearing. Hence, I am proceeding exparte qua the assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records. 4. I have heard the Ld. DR and perused the records. I find that in this case AO has passed an exparte assessment order and Ld. CIT(A) has rejected the submissions on the ground that requisite documentary evidence was not produced. In view of the aforesaid and in the interest of justice, I remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the AO with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee for which the Ld. DR has no objection. I hold and direct accordingly. 5. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 10/03/2025 in the Open Court. SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SR Bhatnagar Copy forwarded to:- 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar "