PAWAN KUMAR JAIN,DELHI V. ITO, WARD-38(8), NEW DELHI

ITA 1745/DEL/2021

AI Insights

The case involves Pawan Kumar Jain, the assessee, who filed a miscellaneous application against the ITAT's earlier order concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The original appeal (ITA No.1745/DEL/2021) dealt with the addition of Rs.18,16,000 as unexplained cash deposits under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) had confirmed this addition without a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The Tribunal found that the issue of cash deposits was not adjudicated in the earlier proceedings, which constituted a mistake apparent on record. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled the earlier order and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 396498 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: CHANDRIMA CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No.136/Del/2022 (in ITA No.1745/DEL/2021) (Assessment Year : 2012-13) AND ITA No.1745/DEL/2021 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Pawan Kumar Jain, vs. ITO, Ward 38 (8), C-88, Prashant Vihar, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 085. (PAN: ACXPJ0814C) (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT/ASSESSEE BY : Ms. Chandrima Choudhary, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30.05.2025 Date of Order : 30.05.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. This misc. application is filed by the Applicant/Assessee against the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.1745/Del/2021 dated 28.02.2022 for Assessment Year 2012-13 for recalling of the said order. 2. At the outset, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee filed the appeal before ITAT, Bench-G vide ITA No. 1745/Del/2021 and accordingly, the matter is fixed for hearing on 28.02.2022, However, during the hearing, 2 MA No.136/Del/2022 and ITA No.1745/Del/2021 the assessee’s case was erroneously called up with the combined hearing on the issue of allowability of contribution received from Employees towards ESI and EPF. He further submitted that the assessee’s case is based on the issue of cash deposits amounting to Rs.8,16,000/-. Therefore, he requested that the matter may be recalled and decide afresh. 3. Ld. DR of the Revenue could not controvert the aforesaid proposition made by the ld. AR o the assessee. 4. After considering the submissions of both the sides, we observed that the Bench has not adjudicated the issue of case deposits. Non-adjudication of the ground is mistake apparent on record. Therefore, we are inclined to allow the misc. application and recall the matter. 5. Further, we also take up the appeal being ITA No.1745/Del/2021 with the consent of both the parties as under. 6. At the outset, ld. AR submitted that in this case, the assessment was concluded at an income of Rs.18,16,000/- vide order dated 21.11.2019 passed under section 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) by making the addition of Rs.18,16,000/- on account of alleged unexplained money in form of cash deposited in his bank account under Section 69A. He submitted that aggrieved with the said addition, the assessee has filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition made the AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal 3 MA No.136/Del/2022 and ITA No.1745/Del/2021 without providing any reasonable opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, he pleaded that the matter may be restored back to the ld. CIT (A) to decide the grounds afresh on merits. 7. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue did not have any objection of remitting the matter back to ld. CIT (A). 8. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the ld. CIT (A) decided the assessee’s appeal ex-parte. In our considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we remit the file back to the ld. CIT (A) to decide the issues on merit as per law and also to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (A) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 30th day of May, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing. SD/- SD/- (VIMAL KUMAR) (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 30.05.2025 TS 4 MA No.136/Del/2022 and ITA No.1745/Del/2021 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "