Anil Kumar HUF, New Delhi V. ITO Ward 49(1), New Delhi

ITA 2098/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8063 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-02-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 23-07-2023
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2098/Del/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Anil Kumar, HUF, B-17/4, Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi – 110 015. PAN: AAFHA2224P Vs ITO, Ward 49(1), New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.L. Deepak, CA Revenue by : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 29.02.2024 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 06.06.2023 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), Delhi-17/10218/2018-19 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 20.12.2018, passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward-49(1), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO). ITA No.2098/Del/2023 2 2. Heard and perused the record. The assessee, as HUF, has filed return of income declaring an income of Rs.2,45,000/- and the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the reason of cash deposit during demonetization period and the ld. AO, on the basis of notices issued and replies filed, had made an addition to the extent of 20% out of total credit entries of Rs.2,42,63,815/- in bank account No.912020020658201 in the name of M/s Ravi Devi Enterprises. The ld.CIT(A) has also sustained the addition. 3. As, before us, the ld. AR canvassed that in fact, this account is not the account of the assessee, Anil Kumar, HUF, but, this bank account is held by Anil Kumar in his individual capacity. It was submitted that inadvertently, at the time of opening of the bank account, PAN Card No.AAFHA2224P was mentioned which is of Anil Kumar, HUF. The ld. AR has placed on record a copy of PAN card of Anil Kumar, individual bearing No.AGGBK2735C. It is also submitted that Anil Kumar, in his individual capacity, has also filed return where this account was disclosed. The ld. DR, however, submitted that before the ld. tax authorities below, these facts were not asserted and there is no specific ground before us also in that regard. 4. After taking into consideration the grounds as raised, we are of the considered view that there is an inherent error in the assessment proceedings which have been initiated against the present appellant, Shri Anil Kumar, HUF, in regard to an account which is in the name of M/s Ravi Devi Enterprises and ITA No.2098/Del/2023 3 the proprietor of the same is Anil Kumar, individual. Whatever error has crept into the bank account leading to scrutiny assessment and the addition are based on a wrong fact about the real identity of the bank accountholder. 5. In the light of the aforesaid, we consider it an appropriate case to restore the issue on merits to the ld. AO. The ld. AO shall give an opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass a fresh order on merits. Consequently, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.02.2024. Sd/- Sd/- (G.S. PANNU) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29 th February, 2024. dk Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi