PUSHTI CREATIONS,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-5(1), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 891/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 July 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues in dispute regarding the additions made in the assessment order back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The AO was directed to pass a denovo order after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of Rs. 27,50,000/- made by the AO under Section 147. The assessee argued that the reassessment proceedings were barred by limitation and that the books of account were rejected without proper consideration.

What were the issues?

Whether reassessment proceedings were validly initiated considering monetary limits and whether books of account were rejected arbitrarily without proper appreciation of evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 149,Section 68,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, CA

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A)// National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order dated 29.10.2025 for the AY 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in initiating proceedings under section 147/148 of the Income-tax Act not considering the monetary limits as per amended provisions of section 149(1)(b) of the Income tax Act vide Finance Act 2021.

I.T.A. No. 891/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 2

2.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the order of AO as the Assessing Officer failed to consider that as the alleged income escaping assessment was less than Rs. 50,00,000/-, as such reassessment proceedings initiated against the assessee were barred under Section 149(1)(b) of the Act (as amended vide Finance Act 2021).

3.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the order of AO as the Ld. Assessing officer rejected the books of account without appreciating the details and supporting documents submitted during assessment proceedings which is unjustified and against the principle of natural justice.

4.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.27,50,000/- rejecting the books of account and treating the cash deposit of Rs.27,50,000/-(59,64,000- 32,14,000) during the demonetization period as unexplained cash deposit under section 68 read with section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act.

5.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in law in treating the cash deposit of Rs.27,50,000/- (59,64,000 -32,14,000) during the demonetization period as unexplained cash deposit under section 68 read with section 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, without considering the submissions made by the Assessee in this regard during assessment proceedings which is arbitrary and against the principle of natural justice.

6.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in failing to appreciate that the order of assessment is itself bad in law, being barred by limitation and therefore liable to set-aside and quashed.

7.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in failing to appreciate that the order of assessment is itself bad in law, being without jurisdiction and therefore liable to set-aside and quashed.

8.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in failing to appreciate that the order of assessment is itself

I.T.A. No. 891/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 3

bad in law, being without jurisdiction and therefore liable to set-aside and quashed. 9. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) 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.”

(B) In this case, assessment order dated 23.05.2023 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) wherein the assessee’s income was determined at Rs. 27,50,000/-. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the Learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 29.10.2025. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 29.10.2025.

(C) At the time of hearing, the Learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the impugned appellate order and the assessment order were passed without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He submitted that the issues in dispute regarding additions made in the assessment order should be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass denovo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The Learned Departmental Representative for Revenue supported the impugned order of the learned CIT(A). After hearing both sides and after due consideration of materials on record; having regard to submissions made by the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee, the issues in dispute regarding additions made in the assessment order are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass denovo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

I.T.A. No. 891/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2017-18 4

(D) All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed off, in accordance with the aforesaid directions. For statistical purposes, the appeal is partly allowed.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on 08/07/2026)

Sd/- (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Date: 08/07/2026 SK, Sr.PS

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A)

Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Lucknow

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →