SADAQAT ALI ANSARI,SITPUR vs. ITO, SITAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 362/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 May 2026AY 2017-20184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for a de novo assessment. The CIT(A) was directed to pass a fresh 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 additions made by the AO under Section 69A and Section 44AD of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that they did not receive a reasonable opportunity during the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard during the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A). Whether the additions made under Section 69A and Section 44AD were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 44AD,Section 115BBE,Section 147,Section 144,Section 253(3),Section 253(5)

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 B. P Yadav, Adv

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.

(A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi, dated 29.09.2023, for the AY 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT-A] has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.40,65,773/-made the Ld. A.O. u/s 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 [referred to as the Act) by not appreciating the merit of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT-A has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.40,65,773/-made the Ld. A.O. u/s 69A of the Act by not appreciating that the deposits made into the bank accounts cannot be treated as unexplained money once the business profit is estimated u/s 44AD of the Act.

I.T.A. No. 362/Lkw/2026 Assessment Year:2017-18 2

3.

The Ld. CIT-A has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.6,68,452/-without appreciating the merit of the case. 4. The Ld. CIT-A has erred on facts and in law in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in computing tax liability at special rate as provided under section 115BBE of the Act. 5. The Ld. A.O. erred on facts and in law in not providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee to have its say in its defense and the impugned order has been passed against the principle of natural justice and fair play. 6. The appellant reserves his right to advance such other grounds before or at the time of hearing which he may consider fit and appropriate, for which he craves leaves to amend, alter or otherwise modify the grounds appearing hereinabove with kind permission of the Hon'ble Bench.”

(B) The present appeal has been filed beyond the time prescribed under section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay in filing of the present appeal. The learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection to condonation of delay, as requested by the appellant assessee. In view of the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned under section 253(5) of the Act and the appeal is admitted.

(C) In this case, assessment order dated 15.12.2019 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) whereby the assessee’s income was determined at Rs. 47,34,230/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, addition of Rs. 40,65,773/- u/s 69A and Rs. 47,34,230/- as income u/s 44AD were made. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 29.09.2023. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A).

I.T.A. No. 362/Lkw/2026 Assessment Year:2017-18 3

(D) At the time of hearing, learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not get reasonable opportunity during the appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A). Therefore, he submitted that the issues in dispute should be restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass fresh appellate order, in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection to this.

(E) In view of the foregoing, after hearing both sides and after due consideration of materials on record, the issues in dispute regarding aforesaid additions of Rs. 40,65,773/- u/s 69A and Rs. 47,34,230/- as income u/s 44AD were restored back to the file of learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass denovo appellate order, in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(F) All the grounds of appeal in present 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 11/05/2026)

Sd/- (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Date: 11/05/2026 SK, Sr.PS

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT

I.T.A. No. 362/Lkw/2026 Assessment Year:2017-18 4

4.

D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A) Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Lucknow

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →