VINOD KUMAR KESHARWANI, BHATAPARA,BHATAPARA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 80/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vinod Kumar Keshwani, the appellant, who contested the additions made by the Assessing Officer (A.O) regarding alleged bogus purchases amounting to Rs.1,11,17,348, treated as unexplained expenditure under section 69C of the Income Tax Act. The appellant also challenged the legality of the notice issued under section 148 and the subsequent reassessment order, claiming it was without proper jurisdiction and sanction. The CIT(Appeals)/NFAC remanded the case for a de novo assessment, allowing the appellant to present additional evidence. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive examination of the new evidence presented.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 314449 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: R.B DOSHI
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Unexplained expenditure; Bogus purchase; Bogus
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर मɅ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.80/RPR/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vinod Kumar Keshwani Vinod Dal Mill, Village: Khokhali, Bhatapara (C.G.)-493 118 PAN: AEWPK4399C ........अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : Shri R.B Doshi, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 06.05.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 07.05.2025 2 Vinod Kumar Keshwani Vs. ITO-1(1), Raipur ITA No. 80/RPR/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 20.12.2024 for the assessment year 2016-17 as per the following grounds of appeal: “1. The AO erred in making addition of Rs.1,11,17,348/- on account of alleged bogus purchases treating it to be unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C. The addition made by the AO is illegal, arbitrary, baseless and not justified. 2. The notice issued u/s.148 and consequent reassessment order passed by AO is illegal inasmuch as the sanction u/s. 151 from specified authority is not as per law and without jurisdiction. 3. The initiation of re-assessment proceedings and issue of notice u/s. 148 is bad in law, illegal and ab initio void. Provisions of section 147 are not attracted in the case of appellant. 4. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend or alter any of the ground/s of appeal.” 2. At the very outset, it is noted that the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had remanded the impugned order of assessment to the file of the A.O for framing denovo assessment observing as follows: “5.5 To prove the genuineness of the purchases, the appellant has, during the course of present proceedings submitted many documentary evidences. On careful perusal of para-1.1 of the submission made by the appellant it is admitted position that many of the documents are being produced for the first time before me. These documents should have been produced by the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings, more particularly, in response to the show cause notice issued to the appellant. 3 Vinod Kumar Keshwani Vs. ITO-1(1), Raipur ITA No. 80/RPR/2025 5.6 Be as it may, these arguments and documents were not available with the AO for his examination and for determination of total income. In the given facts and circumstances, in the interest of substantive justice, I consider it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of assessment to be framed denovo. The appellant is directed to cooperate with the assessment proceeding. 5.7 In view of the decision in para-5.3 above, decision on the remaining grounds of appeal is not required. 6. The appeal filed by the assessee is set aside.” 3. That it was admitted by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee before us that there were certain additional evidences which were produced for the first time before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and the same were not there before the A.O at the time of framing assessment. Therefore, in the interest of substantive justice, the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC accepted those additional evidence and remanded the matter back to the file of the A.O to determine the genuineness of the purchase of the assessee after considering the validity and authenticity of the additional evidence filed by the assessee. 4. In this regard, considering the merits of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC which is hereby upheld. However, at the time of submission, the Ld. Counsel brought to our notice that in Form 35 there were certain legal grounds which were raised before the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC who had not adjudicated the same. In this regard, as evident from Para 5.7 itself of the impugned order 4 Vinod Kumar Keshwani Vs. ITO-1(1), Raipur ITA No. 80/RPR/2025 since the matter has been remanded for denovo adjudication by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, therefore, it had not adjudicated the legal grounds raised by the assessee. Needless to say, since the assessment would be framed in denovo, the assessee shall put forth the legal grounds also before the A.O a/w. necessary documentary evidence. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, find no infirmity in the view taken by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and uphold the same. 5. As per the above terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- ARUN KHODPIA PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) रायपुर/ RAIPUR ; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 7th May, 2025. ***SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ /The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ /The Respondent. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, Raipur Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5 Vinod Kumar Keshwani Vs. ITO-1(1), Raipur ITA No. 80/RPR/2025 आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur. "