VEDBEER SINGH,GHAZIABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2)(5), GHAZIABAD

ITA 1075/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Vedbeer Singh, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, which confirmed the AO's reassessment order under sections 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention was the addition of Rs. 12,48,500 as unexplained cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. The appellant argued that the reassessment was conducted without proper jurisdiction and failed to comply with the mandatory conditions under sections 147 to 151 of the Act. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471525 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 12-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 08-03-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMIT GUPTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144; 234B

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, ITA NO. 1075/Del/2024 A.YR. : 2012-13 VEDBEER SINGH, C/O SANJEEV ANAND AND ASSOCIATES, 136, NAVYUG MARKET, GHAZIABAD (PAN: BBAPS4447M) VS. ITO, WARD 2(2)(5), GHAZIABAD CGO II HAPUR CHUNGI, GHAZIABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by : Shri Sumit Gupta, CA Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR. Date of hearing : 12.11.2024 Date of pronouncement : 14.11.2024 ORDER The Assessee has filed the instant Appeal against the Order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal)/NFAC, Delhi dated 31.10.2023, relating to assessment year 2012-13 on the following grounds:- 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the AO in framing the impugned reassessment order u/s. 144/147 and that too without assuming jurisdiction as per law and without complying with the mandatory conditions u/s. 147 to 151 as envisaged under the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 | P a g e 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 12,48,500/- as unexplained by recording incorrect facts and findings and without observing the principles of natural justice. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 12,48,500/- as unexplained when the deposit in bank account is out of genuine sources. 4. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in not reversing the action of AO in charging interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 2. In this case, AO passed an exparte order u/s. 144 of the Act by making the addition of Rs. 12,48,500/- being cash deposits in bank which remained unexplained. 3. Upon assessee’s appeal, Ld. CIT(A) sustained the addition. 4. Against the Ld. CIT(A)’s order, assessee is in appeal before me. 5. I have heard both the parties and perused the records. I note that both the lower authorities viz. AO as well as CIT(A) noted that assessee has not responded to the notices. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the notices from the revenue authorities did not reach the assessee, which lead to the non- compliance, hence, he prayed that assessee may be given an opportunity before the AO to properly canvass the case. Ld. DR did not object the aforesaid proposition. 5.1 After considering the aforesaid factual matrix, I am of the considered view, that interest of justice will be served, if the issues in dispute are remitted back to the file of the AO with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I hold and direct accordingly. 3 | P a g e 6. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 14/11/2024. Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SRB Copy forwarded to:- 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT Assistant Registrar "