RAJENDRA SINGH,SHAHJAHANPUR V. LD. AO, ASSESSMENT UNIT, JURISDICTIONAL AO- ITO-1(4) SHAHJAHANPUR-1, SHAHJAHANPUR

ITA 645/LKW/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Rajendra Singh, the appellant, who contested the appellate order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concerning the assessment year 2019-20. The primary contention was the addition of Rs.63,68,160, treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The appellant argued that both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) passed their orders without providing adequate opportunities for the appellant to be heard, and the CIT(A) did not address the merits of the various grounds of appeal. The Departmental Representative for Revenue did not object to the restoration of the matter for a de novo assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711520 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH GARG
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.645/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2019-20 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.645/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Rajendra Singh Village Manjha Pashchimi, Alhaganj, Jalalabad U.P. PAN:ERRPS1860N Vs. Income Tax Officer-1(4), Shahjahanpur (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.645/Lkw/2024 has been filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2019-20 against impugned appellate order dated 05/08/2024 (DIN & Order No.NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1067290384(1) passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. Grounds of appeal are as under: “1. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing the order which is illegal, improper and against the principles of natural justice. 2. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing an ex-parte order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. Appellant by Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.645/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2019-20 2 3. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs.63,68,160/- made by Assessing Officer treating it as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 4. The CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing appellate order which is contrary to the facts and law.” ADDITIONAL GROUND “Because the notice u/s 148 dated 29/03/2023 issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) being directly in conflict to the provisions of section 151A, is without jurisdiction, bad in law, the same and the assessment framed thereafter be quashed.” (A.1) The Assessing Officer passed the assessment order u/s 147 read with section 144/144B of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.63,68,160/-, making addition of Rs.63,68,162/- on account of unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide the aforesaid impugned order. The assessee is now in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. (A.2) The assessee has filed additional ground before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. However, at the time of hearing, it was submitted by learned Counsel for the assessee that the additional ground was not being pressed and was being withdrawn. Accordingly, additional ground is hereby dismissed as withdrawn. (B) At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT(A), both passed their respective orders without providing reasonable opportunities to the assessee. He further submitted that the learned CIT(A) did not pass speaking order on merits of the various grounds of appeal. In view of these Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.645/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2019-20 3 submissions, the learned Counsel for the assessee contended that the issues in dispute should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to aforesaid submissions and contentions of learned Counsel for the assessee. He left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. (C) We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. Giving due consideration to the submissions made by the representatives of both sides, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and issues in dispute regarding addition made in the assessment order, are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. (D) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 24/07/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (KUL BHARAT) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Vice President Accountant Member Dated:24/07/2025 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R. ITAT, Lucknow Printed from counselvise.com "