JAY KUMAR SONI,KORBA V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KORBA

ITA 324/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Jay Kumar Soni, who appealed against the order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, which confirmed an addition of Rs. 25,00,000 to his income for the assessment year 2017-18. This addition was based on cash deposits made during the demonetization period, which the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain. The Tribunal noted the lack of a thorough inquiry by the CIT(Appeals) and the non-compliance of the assessee in the initial proceedings. The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals) did not conduct an examination as required under Section 250(4) & (6) of the Income Tax Act, leading to the decision to remand the case for a detailed investigation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712218 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: VEEKASS S SHARMA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ “एक-सदèय” मामला रायपुर मɅ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR Įी पाथ[ सारथी चौधरȣ, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.324/RPR/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Jay Kumar Soni C/o. J.K Jewellers, Power House Road, Korba (C.G.)-495 678 PAN: ANOPS4514N .......अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Korba (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Veekass S Sharma, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 01.08.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 01.08.2025 Printed from counselvise.com 2 Jay Kumar Soni Vs. ACIT, Korba ITA No.324/RPR/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The captioned appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 03.04.2025 for the assessment year 2017-18 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. The relevant facts as discernible from the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC are culled out as follows: “2. The grounds of appeal object to addition of Rs.2500000/- being cash deposited during demonetization period. There is no any submission/explanation regarding cash deposits as queried. Thus the compliance part is most unsatisfactory. Keeping in view of natural justice a one more and final opportunity was given by issuing show cause notice on 12.11.2019 fixing the case for furnishing information/reply by 14.11.2019 but the assessee has not offered any explanation. However, on 30.11.2019 assessee filed a chart of bank accounts where in SBI deposits shows NIL. The submission is not correct as the information available in AO's office clearly shows the deposit of Rs.2500000/- during demonetization period. The department has fully shifted on PAN based data and person is identified by his PAN only, whatever information made available by SBI the assessee has) deposited cash amounting to Rs.25 lakhs in bank a/c. No.32790010157 mentioning the PAN: ANOPS4514N. Thus PAN identified is holding by Shri Jay Kumar Accordingly the assessee was queried to explain the source of this deposit specially deposited during demonetization period. But, it appears that the assessee has decided not to furnish any explanation in this regard. It proves the cash deposited by assessee is out of his undisclosed income and therefore he has no explanation regarding source of deposits. As per information available on record total cash amounting to Rs.25 lakh was deposited in SBI (a/c no.3279D010157). In the explained facts, the AO was left with no-other alternative but to make an addition of Rs.25 lakh u/s.69A of Income Tax Act in the total income of the assessee. The addition of Rs.2500000/- is-confirmed. Printed from counselvise.com 3 Jay Kumar Soni Vs. ACIT, Korba ITA No.324/RPR/2025 3. The appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.” 3. It is clear from the aforesaid facts on record and findings of the first appellate authority that the assessee had filed bank statement of SBI wherein deposits shown is Rs.Nil, whereas, the department had received information in the office of the A.O made available by the SBI that the assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.25 lacs in his bank account No.32790010157, PAN No.ANOPS4514N. In this regard, there has been no enquiry conducted since the assessee was mostly non-compliant during the proceedings as to the statement of SBI which was available with the department regarding cash deposits of Rs.25 lacs and there is no enquiry conducted with regard to the assessee, perhaps due to his such non- compliance. At the same time, the assessee had filed before the department the bank statement from SBI showing deposit as Nil, therefore, before making additions this part needs to be ascertained as to whether at all there were any cash deposits made by the assessee. There is nothing emanating from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC that any enquiry was conducted by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC as mandated u/s. 250(4) & (6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. There has been no examination done by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC before making addition though his powers are co-terminus with that of the A.O. That at the same time, given the facts that the assessee had filed statement of bank account of SBI wherein deposits are shown as “Nil” there emanates some doubt Printed from counselvise.com 4 Jay Kumar Soni Vs. ACIT, Korba ITA No.324/RPR/2025 regarding the tax liability in the hands of the assessee and if such doubt is not clarified and facts established against the assessee in a concrete manner by the revenue then the bonafideness shall automatically tilt towards the assessee. These facts therefore, requires detailed verification. Accordingly, it is best suited that balancing the scales of justice, the matter be remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and the said authority shall adjudicate the same as per law after thorough enquiry as mandated within the provisions of the Act. At the same time, assessee shall provide all the documentary evidence and represent his case on merits before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. I order accordingly. 4. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 01st day of August, 2025. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 1st August, 2025. SB, Sr. PS Printed from counselvise.com 5 Jay Kumar Soni Vs. ACIT, Korba ITA No.324/RPR/2025 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, “एक-सदèय” बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur Printed from counselvise.com "