PARTH SINGH PUNDIR,DEHRADUN V. CIT APPEAL, DEHRADUN

ITA 80/DDN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Parth Singh Pundir, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which had confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer to the Assessee's income for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The additions included unexplained cash deposits during demonetization and disallowance of certain expenses. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had not adequately considered the documents provided by the Assessee and had not given a proper opportunity to contest the additions. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 790073 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A. S. RANA
• Assessee Lawyers: MANVENDRAPRATAP SINGH
• Keywords: Revised return

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 80/DDN/2023 Parth Singh PundirVs.CIT (A) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI [ DELHI BENCH : “SMC (DEHRADUN)/ NEW DELHI”] BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 80/DDN/2023 (A.Y 2017-18) Parth Singh Pundir M/s parth Agencies, 196 Indira Nagar Colony, Dehradun, Uttarakhand PAN: ABSPP7270J Vs CIT Appeal National Faceless Appeal Centre, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. ManvendraPratap Singh, Adv Revenue by Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13/11/2025 Date of Pronouncement 28/11/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 30/08/2023 for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee filed its Return of Income for the A.Y.2017-18 on 31.10.2017 declaring total income of Rs.7,44,410/- and agriculture income of Rs. 2,00,000/- later filed revised return on 05.11.2017. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s. 143(2) &142(1) of the Act were issued to the Assessee. The AO completed the assessment through order u/s 143(3)of the Act dated 19.12.2019, assessing total income at Rs.1,18,75,318/- by adding : i)Rs.1,10,48,000/- on account of the un Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 80/DDN/2023 Parth Singh PundirVs.CIT (A) explained cash deposits in the bank accounts during the demonetization u/s.69A of the IT Act, 1961. ii) Rs. 82,908/- on account of disallowance of 20% of the expenses claimed under the head freight and cartage. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 19/12/2019, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 30/08/2023, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 30/08/2023, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 4. Though the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee are argumentative in nature, addressing on the grounds of appeal of the Assessee, the Assessee submitted that the lower authorities have not taken into consideration of the documents produced by the Assessee and the additions have been made which have been confirmed by the Assessee without providing proper opportunity to the Assessee and without verifying the material on record. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal. 5. Per contra, Ld. Department's Representative relying on the orders of the lower authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the order impugned, the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 80/DDN/2023 Parth Singh PundirVs.CIT (A) additions have been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the Assessee has not provided complete cash book for the entire year as well as the previous year and no proper submissions have been made in support of both the additions. It is the specific case of the Assessee that the entire documents have been produced which have not been considered by the authorities below. In view of the above, we remand the entire issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment in accordance with law and the Assessee is at liberty to produce all the documents in support of his claims and contentions. Accordingly, the issue involved in the present appeal is restored to the file of the A.O. 7. In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th November, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 28 .11.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 80/DDN/2023 Parth Singh PundirVs.CIT (A) Printed from counselvise.com "