THE ST. ANDREWS COLLEGE ASSOCIATION,GORAKHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GORAKHPUR

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 07.11.2023, pertaining to the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. BECAUSE on passed order the captioned appellate date 07-11- 2023 is bad in law in as much as that the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has dismissed the appeal summarily without adjudicating all the grounds of appeals on merits. 2. BECAUSE the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has failed to appreciate that in terms of the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250 of the I.T Act, 1961, it is the statutory obligation of the learned CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal on merits and in writing by stating the points for determination, the decision thereon and reason for the decision. 3. BECAUSE the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has failed to appreciate that non consideration of Grounds of Appeal on merit is the out rightly denial of opportunity to the appellant and is clearly the violation of principle of natural justice. 4. BECAUSE the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has failed to appreciate that in term of the provisions of sub section (6) of section 250 of the I.T Act, 1961, irrespective of the non-appearance of the appellant

ITA. No. 92/VNS/2024 Page 2 of 4 before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) ought to have dealt with all the issues so raised by the assessee appellant on merits and by way of speaking order and in accordance with law. 5. BECAUSE the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in not adjudicating the specific Ground No-4, of Appeal raised before him which reads as under :- "section 69A states that "where in any financial year the assessee is found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article and such money, bullion, jewellery or valuable article is not recorded in the Books of Account, if any, maintained by him for any source of income, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source of acquisition of the money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article, or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the money and the value of the bullion, jewellery or other valuable article may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year." All the cash deposits in the bank account as mentioned were Recorded in the Book of Account. Thus, section 69A in the given case is not applicable in the instant case as the assessee duly recorded in the cash deposits & the bank account in which such cash deposits were made in the receipts & payment account & Balance Sheet." 6. BECAUSE the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in not adjudicating the specific Ground No-9, of Appeal raised before him which reads as under :- "The learned assessing officer has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A and 2348." 7. BECAUSE the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in not adjudicating the specific Ground No-10, of Appeal raised before him which reads as under :- "The learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B without passing order relating thereto" 8. BECAUSE the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in not considering the explanations and submissions of the appellant in respect of nature and source of amount deposited in bank and the evidence furnished in the form of financial statement i.e. Balance Sheet, Income & Expenditure A/C, fee receipt detailed in excel sheet during appellant proceeding and upholding the addition of Rs. 59,46,352/- under section 69A as unexplained income. Hence, the appellant prays that the Grounds of Appeal raised above may kindly be considered and adjudicated in terms of the provisions of law.”

ITA. No. 92/VNS/2024 Page 3 of 4 2. At the time of hearing, the assessee sought permission to withdraw the present appeal. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Departmental Representative) did not raise any objection to the request made by the assessee.

Sd/- Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] [KUL BHARAT] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 20/07/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR

By order Sr. Private Secretary

// True Copy//

ITA. No. 92/VNS/2024 Page 4 of 4