LATE SHRI GANGA RAM BISHNOI TH. L/H SHRI BRIJLAL BISHNOI.,BIKANER vs. ITO, NOKHA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 170/JODH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur07 August 2026AY 2010-114 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found incurable deficiencies in the assessment and appeal orders, noting confusion regarding the assessee's status as individual versus AOP. It held that the addition was wrongly made in the hands of the individual assessee when the bank account clearly belonged to an AOP.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 against the deceased assessee for a deposit of Rs. 30,06,010/-. The assessee contended that the bank account belonged to an Association of Persons (AOP) and not an individual.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made in the hands of an individual assessee was valid when the bank account in question belonged to an Association of Persons (AOP). The validity of reopening the assessment under Section 147 was also raised.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari CA, (Physically)
For Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, Addl. CIT-DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 170/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year 2010-11)

Late Shri Ganga Ram Bishnoi Th. ITO, Nokha, L/H Sh. Brijlal Bishnoi. Bikaner Ganga Ram Bishnoi Gram Mukam, Vs. Himatsar Nokha Bikaner, Rajasthan-334802 PAN No. BIPPB7933P Assessee by Shri Amit Kothari CA, (Physically) Revenue by Ms. Nidhi Nair, Addl. CIT-DR (Physically) Date of Hearing 03 / 08 / 2026. Date of Pronouncement 07 / 08 / 2026.

ORDER Per: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice President : This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 23-02-2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2010-11.

2.

The dispute in the present appeal is confined to addition of an amount of Rs.30,06,010/-. Of course, assessee has also raised a ground challenging the validity of reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Act.

2 ITA No. 170/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) 3. Briefly, the facts are, the assessee, since deceased, is represented through his legal heir. The Assessing Officer, having found that an amount of Rs.30,06,010/- was deposited in an account held with State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Jangloo Branch, in the financial year relevant to Assessment Year 2010-11 initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act by issuing a notice under Section 148 of the Act in the name of deceased assessee. In response to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act, assessee submitted that the bank account in question relates to Association of Persons (AOP) and not to any individual. Thus, assessee submitted that since the bank account does not belong to him, proceedings under Section 147 of the Act should be dropped.

4.

After considering submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment vide order dated 27-11-2017 by recording the status of the assessee as AOP, though the order was passed in the name of assessee in his individual capacity.

5.

Against the assessment order so passed, assessee preferred an appeal before learned First Appellate Authority. However, vide impugned order, the appeal was dismissed.

6.

We have considered rival submissions and perused the materials on record. Having gone through the orders passed by Departmental Authorities and other materials on record, we find that there are incurable deficiencies in them. Firstly, though the notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued in the name of

3 ITA No. 170/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) individual assessee, however, assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act was completed in the name of the assessee while mentioning the status as AOP. Whereas, learned First Appellate Authority also appears to be equally confused, as in the cause title, he has mentioned the status of the assessee as individual, while in the concluding paragraph, he has mentioned the status of the assessee as AOP.

7.

Be that as it may, in course of assessment proceedings as also before the First Appellate Authority, the assessee had not only furnished a copy of the bank account but had specifically brought to the notice of the Departmental Authorities that the subject bank account was in the name of five persons and not in the name of any individual. Thus, it is clear that the bank account belongs to the AOP. Whereas, the entire addition representing the deposits made in the bank account has been made at the hands of the assessee. Perusal of the bank account, a copy of which is placed at page 41 of the paper book, clearly establishes assessee’s claim. Thus, on overall consideration of facts and material on record, we have no hesitation in deleting the impugned addition.

8.

In the result, appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in open court on 07/08/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

4 ITA No. 170/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dated : 07/08/ 2026. Aks/- True Copy Copies to : (1) The appellant. (2) The respondent. (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →