SARADA AJARANANDA,GURGAON V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON

ITA 252/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves SaradaAjarananda, the Appellant, contesting the assessment orders for the Assessment Year 2017-18, which included substantial additions under sections 68 and 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Appellant argued that these additions were made arbitrarily and without proper consideration of the evidence and submissions provided. The initial assessment and subsequent appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals were unsuccessful, leading to the filing of this appeal. The Tribunal considered the additional documents submitted by the Appellant, which were not previously available to the lower authorities, and decided to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474883 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VISHAL AGARWAL; PANKAJ
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 143(2); 68; 69A

Judgement Text

" 1 ITA No. 252/Del/2024 SaradaAjarananda Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 252/DEL/2024 (A.Y. 2017-18) SaradaAjarananda 494/10, Krishna Colony, Gurgaon, Haryana PAN: ABFPA8370D Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 4(1) HSIIDC Building, udyogVihar, Phase-V, Gurgaon, Haryana Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Vishal Agarwal, Adv and Sh. Pankaj Jain, Adv Revenue by Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement 27/02/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal/National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘NFAC’ for short] dated 05/12/2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. On facts and in circumstances of the ease, the impugned assessment order dated 30.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) and the appellate order passed by the CIT(A) dated 05.12.2023 are illegal, vexatious, perverse, without application of mind, arbitrary and hence are liable to be vacated. 2 ITA No. 252/Del/2024 SaradaAjarananda Vs. ITO 2 On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order dated 30.12.2019 passed by the ITO by making illegal and arbitrary addition of Rs. 8,22,53,850/- u/s 69A alleging the same as unexplained cash deposit just based on his own assumptions, presumption, whims and fancies without appreciating the documents, submissions. evidences and explanation made before him and hence illegal addition made on this account is liable to be deleted. 3 On the facts and in circumstances of the ease and in law, the assessment order dated 30.12.2019 passed by the ITO by making illegal addition of Rs. 86,73,823/- u/s 68 alleging the same as unexplained cash credit in the capital account just based on his own assumptions, presumption, whims and fancies without appreciating the documents and submissions made before him and hence illegal addition made on this account is liable to be deleted 4 On facts and in circumstances of the case, ITO has erred in passing the impugned assessment order dated 30.12.2019 and CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order passed by the ITO, without any fair and objective application of mind to the submissions made and without making proper enquiries and verification, by obtaining behind the back of the appellant, without providing effective opportunity of personal hearing, without issuing effective show cause notice specifically proposing to make any such additions, without adducing and providing any adverse material, evidence or basis and in gross violation of principle of natural justice, hence both the orders are liable to be quashed. 5. On facts and in circumstances of the case, ITO has erred in passing the impugned assessment order dated 30.12.2019 without rejecting the books of accounts maintained by the appellant and without raising any objection in respect of correctness and completeness of the accounts and evidences submitted before him. 3 ITA No. 252/Del/2024 SaradaAjarananda Vs. ITO 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO erred by framing the assessment without issuance and service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. The re- assessment is illegal and without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed. 7. On facts and in circumstances of the case, authorities below are also wrong in raising and confirming illegal demands of tax, interest and penalties. Mechanically and perversely, all demands as well as penalty notices are liable to be quashed.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) on 30/12/2019 by making an addition of Rs. 86,73,823/- u/s 68 of the Act and Rs. 8,22,53,850/- u/s 69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 30/12/2019, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 05/12/2023, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 05/12/2023, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 4. The Assessee has filed an application for admission of additional evidence i.e. bank certificates and property registration documents, contending that those document could not be produced before the A.O. due to bona-fide reasons and the documents produced by way of additional evidence will go into the roots of the matter, which will assist 4 ITA No. 252/Del/2024 SaradaAjarananda Vs. ITO the authorities in deciding the lis, therefore, sought for admitting the additional documents. 5. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the documents produced by the Assessee cannot be admitted at this belated stage, thus sought for rejecting the application as well as dismissal of the Appeal. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is the case of the Assessee that the additions have been made u/s 69A and 68 of the Act arbitrarily and without application of mind. Further submitted that the Assessee has obtained and produced bank certificatesregarding the cash deposit made during the demonization period and also procured the sale deeds which could not be produced before the Lower Authorities. 7. Considering the fact that the above mentioned additional documents are produced for the first time before us, without commenting on those documents with an intention to provide an opportunity to the A.O. to verify the same, we deem it fit to remand the matter to the file of the A.O. to frame de-novo assessment by considering the above documents produced by the Assessee and frame the assessment order in accordance with law after hearing the Assessee. 5 ITA No. 252/Del/2024 SaradaAjarananda Vs. ITO 8. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th February, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 27.02.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "