SANDEEP KUMAR,UNNAO V. ITO WARD-2(4), UNNAO

ITA 621/LKW/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sandeep Kumar against the order of the Learned Addl/JCIT Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- 5, Mumbai, concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issues in the appeal included the treatment of certain credit entries as business turnover and unexplained money under sections 69A and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, as well as the application of a tax rate based on business margins. The tribunal noted the absence of the appellant during the hearings and proceeded to dismiss the appeal based on the lack of prosecution.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788394 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 16-10-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT KUMAR
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ‘एकल’ न्यायपीठ, लखनऊ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW श्री क ुल भारत, उपाध्यक्ष क े समछ BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं/ ITA No.621/LKW/2024 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sandeep Kumar M/s Sandeep Traders, Abdullapur, Miyaganj, Unna- 209801. v. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(4) Makhi House, Civil Lines, Unnao-204150. PAN:DCMPK4762C अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant by: None प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent by: Shri Amit Kumar, Sr. DR सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date of hearing: 25 11 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date of pronouncement: 27 11 2025 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Addl/JCIT Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- 5, Mumbai dated 29.08.2024 pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. THAT the AO as well as CIT(A)/NFAC has failed to appreciated that total credit entries amounting to Rs.73,16,000/- which was credited by the parties as well as outstanding proceeds received. The AO as well as CIT(A) has treated as Rs.68,06,000/- as turnover of business and Rs.5,10,000/- as unexplained money u/s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 2. THAT the AO as well as CIT(A)/NFAC has taken the amount of Rs.68,06,000/- as business received and worked out 8% tax u/s.44AD amounting to Rs.5,44,480/- and added the same, whereas the margin in this type of trading business is about 3%, the addition made by the AO and upheld by CIT(A) is erroneous bad in law be deleted. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.621/LKW/2024 Page 2 of 3 3. THAT the AO as well as has failed to appreciate that Rs.5,10,000/- being old SBN deposited in bank account duly recorded in books of accounts, the said amount is last year balances, which was credited in this year, cannot be treated as undisclosed or unexplained. The AO has wrong applied the provisions of section 69A of the Act and upheld by the CIT(A), the addition made be deleted. 4. THAT the appellant craves leaves to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.” 2. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and is being disposed of on the basis of the material available on record. 3. Apropos to the grounds of appeal, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities and contended that the assessee grossly failed to support with evidence opening balance of cash in hand as on 08.11.2016. Therefore, the authorities below were justified in making the addition and sustaining the same. 4. Heard the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and perused the material available on records. A perusal of the order sheet entries shows that this appeal was filed on 16.10.2024 and since then the appeal has been adjourned on various occasions i.e. 04.12.2024, 17.04.2025, 23,04.2025, 29.05.2025, 28.10.2025 and 25.11.2025, however, neither did anyone appear on behalf of the assessee nor was any application for seeking adjournment is filed by the assessee. Under these circumstances, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the present appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. However, strictly in terms of the proviso to Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, the assessee is at liberty to approach this Tribunal for recall of this order and Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.621/LKW/2024 Page 3 of 3 restoration of the appeal, provided the assessee can demonstrate a sufficient cause for non-appearance on the date of hearing. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/11/2025. Sd/- [क ुल भारत] [KUL BHARAT] उपाध्यक्ष/VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 27/11/2025 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard File //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "