MEETU JAISWAL,BAREILLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), PILIBHIT, PILIBHIT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 274/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 May 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Both parties agreed that the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment. The AO was directed to pass a denovo order after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 and 2017-18. The core issue involved additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on account of unexplained investment, which the assessee contended were made from known sources like savings, business income, and rental income.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made by the AO on account of unexplained investment were justified, and if the principles of natural justice were violated by not providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,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 Jitendra Kumar Yadav, Adv

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 122/Lkw/2026
I.T.A. No. 274/Lkw/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) These appeals have been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate orders of learned CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vice common orders dated 24.10.2025 for the AY 2015-16 & 2017-18 respectively. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: ITA No. 122/Lkw/2026 1. 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.

I.T.A. Nos. 122 & 274/Lkw/2026 Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2017-18 2

2.

Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming an addition of Rs. 35,31,120/-as Unexplained Investment since the Assessing Officer assessed the income at Rs. 35,31,120/-instead of the income shown in the relevant return of income based on the documents and the records produced before Assessing officer. 3. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming an addition of Rs. 35,31,120/- as the Ld. AO should not have disturbed the Returned income particularly when the assessee is a small business Woman and there is much profit in the business particularly as this is a small profit business. 4. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition made by AO since the Property purchase by the assessee from its small savings and also from Income earned from business as well as Rental Income shown in the Return. 5. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition made by AO as the assessee hold half of share in the property and A.O has made addition of Unexplained investment of full value of property purchased in the hands of the assessee, which is against natural Justice and by ignoring the consideration shown in the registered deed. ITA No. 174/Lkw/2026

1.

Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in partially allowing the appeal and direction given to Assessing Officer only for grant of relief of double addition made by Assessing Officer and the Ld. AO added of Rs. 16,55,000/- (after give effect) as Unexplained Investment since the Property purchase by the assessee from its small savings and also from Income earned from business as well as Rental Income shown in the Return. 2. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in as the assessee has purchased Agricultural land from known sources and the Ld. Assessing Officer has made addition on full value of property purchased as per circle rate instead of actual purchase consideration of such Agricultural land. 3. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 16,55,000/- without considering the fact as the assessee has purchased

I.T.A. Nos. 122 & 274/Lkw/2026 Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2017-18 3

Agricultural land for Rs. 8,28,000/- and considering the same as Rs. 16,55,000/- being the stamp duty value without referring to DVO or without considering that the stamp value is not a capital asset. 4. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the order of assessment as the Ld. AO has determined the above income of the assessee is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. 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) 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 24.03.2022 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) wherein the assessee’s income was determined at Rs. 2,68,120. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the Learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 24.10.2025. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 24.10.2025.

(D) 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

I.T.A. Nos. 122 & 274/Lkw/2026 Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2017-18 4

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 expressed no objection to this. In view of the foregoing, after hearing both sides and after due consideration of materials on record; 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 pas denovo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

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

(Order was pronounced in the open court on 07/05/2026)

Sd/- (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Date: 07/05/2026 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 →