RAJEEV RANJAN,PATNA BIHAR V. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PATNA, BIHAR

ITA 150/PAT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Rajeev Ranjan, the appellant, who contested an addition of \\u20b946,99,000 to his income, classified as unexplained cash deposits under Section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had initially assessed Ranjan's income for the year 2017-18 at \\u20b91,46,89,000, significantly higher than the \\u20b99,90,000 declared. The CIT(A) dismissed Ranjan's appeal ex parte due to non-compliance, which led to the current appeal before the ITAT. The primary contention was the alleged double taxation of income already declared by Ranjan, which included the disputed cash deposits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 781238 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.150/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rajeev Ranjan..…………………..………. …………………....Appellant Saket Puri New Kunj Colony, Bazar Samiti, Patna, Bihar- 800016.. [PAN: ALFPR5222F] vs. ACIT, Patna………..…....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Tripurari Kumar, CA, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 14, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 21, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal is directed by the assessee against the order dated 23.01.2025 passed by the CIT(Appeals), under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, determining the total income of the assessee at ₹1,46,89,000 as against the income of ₹99,90,000 declared in the return of income. The Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹46,99,000 under Section 69A of the Act, treating it as unexplained cash deposits. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.150/Pat/2025 Rajeev Ranjan 2 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte for non- compliance, thereby upholding the assessment order. 4. Before us, the learned Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the addition of ₹46,99,000 made under Section 69A is wholly unjustified, since the assessee had already disclosed total income of ₹99,90,000, which included the alleged cash deposits in question. It was argued that making a separate addition of the same amount results in double taxation of the same income. 5. It was further submitted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without examining this crucial factual aspect and without adjudicating the matter on merits. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the assessee prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. 6. The learned Departmental Representative (DR) fairly submitted that he has no serious objection if the matter is remanded to the CIT(A) for decision afresh after affording due opportunity to the assessee. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex parte without considering the merits of the case. The assessee had filed a return declaring income of ₹99,90,000, and the addition of ₹46,99,000 appears to overlap with the disclosed income, which requires proper verification. In the interest of justice and fair play, we therefore deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.150/Pat/2025 Rajeev Ranjan 3 directed to produce all supporting documents and explanations before the CIT(A) to substantiate his claim. 8. In view of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 21st October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदèय/Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय/Judicial Member Dated: 21.10.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "