RAJNEESH KUMAR SINGH,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD

ITA 4030/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves four appeals by Rajneesh Kumar Singh against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Faridabad, concerning the assessment years 2013-14 to 2016-17. The primary issue in these appeals was the addition of unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, which the assessee claimed were proceeds from his business in trading clothes and readymade garments. The CIT(A)/NFAC had upheld the Assessing Officer's decision, citing the absence of sufficient evidence from the assessee to substantiate his claims. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not appeared in previous hearings and decided to restore the matter to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation, particularly focusing on the legal validity of the section 151 approval for the reassessment proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 38247 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 242 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSRA
• Section: 147; 68

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member ITA No. 4027/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2013-14 ITA No. 4028/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 ITA No. 4029/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2015-16 ITA No. 4030/Del/2024 : Asstt. Year: 2016-17 Rajneesh Kumar Singh, C-199, Bhoomiheen Camp, Govindpuri, Tuglakabad, New Delhi Delhi-110019 Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Faridabad-121001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. EQQPS6238L Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 20.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 20.03.2025 ORDER Per Bench: The instant batch of four appeals pertains to the single assessee herein namely, Sh. Rajneesh Kumar Singh. All other relevant details thereof stand tabulated as under: Sl. No. ITA Nos. Appellant Respondent A.Y. Order passed against Proceedings u/s 1. 4027/Del/2024 Rajneesh Kumar Singh ITO 2013-14 NFAC, Delhi, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024 -25/1066329817(1) Dated 02.07.2024 147 r.w.s. 144 2. 4028/Del/2024 Rajneesh Kumar Singh ITO 2014-15 NFAC, Delhi, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024 -25/1066329949(1) Dated 02.07.2024 147 r.w.s. 144 ITA Nos. 4027 to 4030/Del/2024 Rajneesh Kumar Singh 2 3. 4029/Del/2024 Rajneesh Kumar Singh ITO 2015-16 NFAC, Delhi, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024 -25/1066330051(1) Dated 02.07.2024 147 r.w.s. 144 4. 4030/Del/2024 Rajneesh Kumar Singh ITO 2016-17 NFAC, Delhi, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024 -25/1066330255(1) Dated 02.07.2024 147 r.w.s. 144 2. Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. The assessee had admittedly not appeared in the earlier hearings as well. We thus proceeded ex-parte. 3. It is next noticed with the above assistance coming from the Revenue side that the CIT(A)/NFAC herein has affirmed the Assessing Officer’s findings assessing the assessee’s cash deposits made in all these four years; involving varying sums, respectively, as unexplained, in the course of assessment(s) on the ground that no justifiable explanation had come from his side. 4. We note in this factual backdrop that the learned assessing authority had completed it’s impugned four assessment(s) ex- parte whilst making section 68 addition(s) of unexplained cash credit. The assessee then pleaded in the lower appellate proceedings that the impugned cash deposits infact represented his business sales in trading of clothes and readymade garments. Learned CIT(A)/NFAC holds in the identical lower ITA Nos. 4027 to 4030/Del/2024 Rajneesh Kumar Singh 3 appellate order(s) that the assessee could not prove copies of the corresponding trade license, books of account, bank statement, transportation receipts as well as other details of daily sales and purchase so as satisfy the rigor of section 68 of the Act. 5. It is in this factual backdrop that we notice that not only the assessee has sought to challenge validity of the impugned section 147 proceedings but also his case is that the impugned addition(s) are not sustainable on merits since based on an invalid approval of the prescribed authority u/s 151 of the Act. His last legal plea of section 151 approval appears to have been raised for the first time before us which indeed goes to the root of the matter in light of CIT vs. S. Goyanka Lime and Chemical Ltd. (2023) 453 ITR 242 (SC). 6. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant identical four appeals back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication as per law preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. It shall further consider the assessee’s section 151 approval plea (supra) as well after affording adequate opportunities of ITA Nos. 4027 to 4030/Del/2024 Rajneesh Kumar Singh 4 hearing to file afresh evidence; if so advised. Ordered accordingly. 7. No other ground or arguments has been pressed before us at this stage. 8. These assessee’s four appeals i.e. ITA Nos. 4027 to 4030/Del/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 20/03/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitabh Shukla) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 20/03/2025 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR "