GURPREET SINGH BHATIA,PUNJABI BAGH EXTENSION V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-44(6), NEW DELHI, CIVIC CENTRE

ITA 958/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Gurpreet Singh Bhatia, the appellant, who is in the business of wholesale and retail trade of fabrics. The Income-tax Officer (ITO) made an addition of Rs.1,08,40,000 to the assessee's income for the assessment year 2017-18, citing abnormal cash deposits during the demonetization period. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, leading to the current appeal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without adequately considering the assessee's submissions, thus violating the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315752 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM KRISHAN MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: SHIVAM MALIK
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: E : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.958/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gurpreet Singh Bhatia, House No.11, Street No.23, Punjabi Bagh Extension, Delhi – 110 026. PAN: AIIPS0365E Vs Income-tax Officer, Ward-44(6), New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shivam Malik, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ram Krishan Meena, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 13.05.2025 ORDER PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: This appeal by the appellant assessee is against the order dated 3rd January, 2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. CIT(A)’] u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in appeal arising out of the order dated 24.12.2019 u/s 143(3) of the Act of the Income-tax Officer, Ward-44(6), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. AO’), for assessment year 2017-18. ITA No.958/Del/2025 2 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee e-filed ITR for the assessment year 2017-18 on 04.11.2017 declaring the income at Rs.13,27,320/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS for the reasons, ‘Abnormal cash deposit during demonetization period.’ Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 16.08.2018 was issued. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 02.05.2019 containing a detailed questionnaire was issued. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 03.06.2019 was issued, but, the assessee did not file the reply. On the basis of the information, the ld. AO completed the proceedings vide order dated 24.12.2019 by making an addition of Rs.1,08,40,000/-. 3. The appellant assessee, against the order dated 24.12.2019 of the ld. AO, preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) which was dismissed vide order dated 03.01.2025. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant assessee preferred the present appeal. 5. The ld. Authorised Representative for the appellant-assessee submitted that the appellant is an individual in the business of wholesale and retail trade of fabrics under the name and style of Yoges Trading Company. As normal trend of the business, 15-20% is cash sales which is regularly deposited in the bank account from time to time. In response to the notices, the appellant made part submissions and requested adjournment for making further submissions which was not granted. The ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the submissions. ITA No.958/Del/2025 3 6. The ld. Authorised Representative for the Department relied on the order of the ld.CIT(A). 7. From examination of record, in the light of the aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that the ld.CIT(A), vide order dated 3rd January, 2025, dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution/non-filing of specific submissions. The appellant assessee claims that the ld.CIT(A) failed to consider part submissions in violation of the principles of natural justice. In view of the above material facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) dated 03.01.2025 is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.05.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 15th May, 2025. dk ITA No.958/Del/2025 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "