SAYED HILAL,LUCKNOW V. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE VI, LUCKNOW

ITA 300/LKW/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Sayed Hilal, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 07/02/2025, which was a result of a remand from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's earlier decision. The primary contention was the inadequate opportunity provided to the assessee to respond to the remand report from the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument and directed a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711630 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REVENUE EXPRESSED; AMIT KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SAMRAT CHANDRA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Peak credit; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.300/LKW/2025 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sayed Hilal Behind Nawab Market, Musaibganj, Lucknow-226003. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Range-VI Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57, Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow-226001. PAN:ABYPH7272E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: 1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”]/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 07/02/2025 for the assessment year 2009-10. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under: - “1. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and deserves to be quashed being illegal. 2. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law in restricting the amount of Rs. 1,92,632/- against Rs. 27,47,815/- made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in failing to consider the daily sales are deposited in bank and cash withdrawn for purchase of fruits and vegetables. Therefore, benefit of peak credits/ telescoping should have been given. 4. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the order of Assessment has been passed in absolute violation of the principles of Natural Justice, without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and therefore deserves to be declared a nullity. 5. The appellant craves for leave to add, modify, amend or delete any other and further grounds of appeal with permission.” Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.300/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 3 2. In this case, assessment order dated 22/03/2013 was passed under section 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short). The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) in his impugned appellate order dated 30.05.2014. The assessee filed appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the aforesaid order dated 30.05.2014 of the Ld. CIT(A), which was decided by Co- ordinate Bench of ITAT Lucknow Bench vide order dated 16.04.2015. In the aforesaid order dated 16.04.2015, the order dated 30.05.2014 of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside and the matter was restored to his file for deciding the issue fresh, after obtaining remand report from the Assessing Officer and after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to both the sides. Subsequently, fresh appellate order dated 07.02.2025 was passed by the Ld. CIT(A). The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid fresh appellate order dated 07.02.2025. 2.1 At the time of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the aforesaid order dated 07.02.2025 without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to make submissions and to adduce relevant materials in response to remand report sent by the Assessing Officer to the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) should be directed to pass fresh order after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee to make submissions and to adduce relevant materials in response to remand report sent by the Assessing Officer to the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to this. In view of the foregoing and in the specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal, the impugned order dated 07.02.2025 is set aside and the Ld. CIT(A) is directed Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.300/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 3 to pass de novo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to both the sides and in particular after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee to make submissions and to adduce relevant materials in response to remand report sent by the Assessing Officer to the Ld. CIT(A). All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid direction. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/07/2025. Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21/07/2025 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard file By order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary Printed from counselvise.com "