JITENDRA GOYAL,DELHI V. ITO,WARD-59(4), DELHI

ITA 6130/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Jitendra Goyal, the appellant, who contested the order of the CIT(A) affirming the Income Tax Officer's (ITO) decision to add Rs. 11,91,835 as unexplained cash deposits to his income for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The ITO had reopened the assessment based on information that the appellant deposited a significant amount of cash in his bank account during the relevant financial year and had not filed an income tax return for that year. The appellant, in response to the notices, filed a return declaring income from business and profession and other sources, which was not accepted by the ITO, leading to the appeal before the CIT(A) and subsequently the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312965 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

"1 ITA no. 6130/Del/2024 Jitendra Goyal IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6130/DEL/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Jitendra Goyal, A-28/1, New Govind Pura, New Delhi-110092. PAN- AFCPG 5051 L Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-59(4), Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by None Department represented by Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17.04.2025 Date of pronouncement 30.04.2025 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order dated 21.10.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai, arising out of the order passed by the ITO, ward-59(4), New Delhi, under Section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 26.12.2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on receipt of AIR/NMS information that during F.Y. 2010-11 relevant to A.Y. 2011-12 the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs. 11,91,835/- in his bank account and that the assessee had not filed ITR for A.Y. 2011-12. The AO, after getting necessary approval from the competent authorities, 2 ITA no. 6130/Del/2024 Jitendra Goyal reopened the assessee’s case and issued notice dated 29.03.2018 u/s 148 of the Act. In compliance thereto the assessee filed its ITR declaring total income of Rs. 1,69,070/- from business and profession and income from other sources. Further, in compliance to the statutory notices issued by the AO u/s 143(2) and 142(1) the assessee also furnished information as called for. Rejecting the explanation furnished by the assessee the AO added Rs. 11,91,835/- as unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A read with section 115BBE to the income returned by the assessee. Aggrieved against it the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A), who vide his impugned order dated 21.10.2024 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the action of AO. Aggrieved against the order of learned CIT(A) now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. No one appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing despite issuance of notices for hearing through RPAD. Accordingly, the case is taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee. 4. Heard the Ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. The Ld. DR submitted that despite opportunities given, the assessee failed to furnish supporting evidence with regard to cash deposits. He supported the orders of authorities below. It is seen that before the lower authorities the assessee had submitted that he had received the money from his father who had received the same on partition and the same was deposited by the assessee in his bank account. Under these facts and circumstances of the matter, in order to do substantial justice this Bench deems it fit and proper to grant further 3 ITA no. 6130/Del/2024 Jitendra Goyal opportunity of being heard to the assessee narrating the issue on the merit of the matter before the authorities below. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) for consideration of the issue afresh and to pass a reasoned order by granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. It is also made clear that in the event the assessee does not cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A), the said authority would be at liberty to pass order as deem fit in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 4. In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 30.04.2025. Sd/- (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "