AVDESH KUMAR DIXIT,AGRA vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AGRA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH (SMC), AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 108/Agr/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Avdesh Kumar Dixit Vs. ITO, 4/286 Baluganj, Ward-1(1)(1), Agra-282001. Agra. PAN : ABLPD9930C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Sahib P. Satsangi, C.A. Department by Sh. Harsh Siddharth Gautam, Sr. DR (Physical hearing) Date of hearing 21.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 21.04.2026 ORDER PER : S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The assessee has filed this appeal against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi 11.12.2025 for the Assessment Year 2017-18, wherein the assessee has raised following grounds:-

"1. Because under the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order passed under section 144 of the 1.T. Act, 1961 by the learned Assessing Officer (AO) by making additions beyond the scope of Limited Scrutiny. The case was specifically selected for scrutiny to verify cash deposits during the demonetization period (Nov 9, 2016- Dec 30, 2016). By making additions for deposits made during the entire

ITA No.108/Agr/2026

financial year, the learned AO has exceeded the jurisdiction conferred by the CASS (Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection) notice. 2. Because under the facts and in the circumstances of the cash and in law the learned AO failed to provide the appellant with a specific Show Cause Notice regarding the expansion of the scope of the assessment. This constitutes a gross violation of the Rs. Principles of Natural Justice, as the appellant was under the bona fide belief that the inquiry was restricted only to the demonetization period. 3. Because in any view of the case the cash deposited during demonetisation is the bank accounts of the appellant was Rs. 5,60,500 supported with reference to the income disclosed in the return filed for the impugned year whereas the addition has been made under section 69A of the LT. Act, 1961 in respect of cash deposited in the bank accounts of the appellant amounting to Rs. 34,21,000 based on suspicion and conjectures rather than any incriminating evidence found during the limited inquiry. 4. Because under the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Authorities below failed to follow the mandatory procedure laid down in CBDT Instruction No. 5/2016 (and subsequent circulars), which strictly prohibits an Assessing Officer from expanding the scope of a Limited Scrutiny audit to Re a Complete Scrutiny without (a) Recording a reasonable belief that there is a potential escalation of income (b) Obtaining prior written approval from the PCIT (Principal Commissioner of Income Tax) OR CIT. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, OR 5 withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at OR before the time of R the hearing.” 2. At the time of hearing, Id. AR of the assessee brought to my notice that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act") was passed ex-parte for the reasons that assessee had not made any compliance for the various statutory notices issued by him. Accordingly, assessment was completed u/s 144 of the Act. Further, he submitted that aggrieved with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before NFAC. However, even

2 | P a g e

ITA No.108/Agr/2026

before Ld. CIT (Appeals) the assessee has not complied to various notices issued for hearing, neither filed any reply. Further he submitted that assessee being uneducated and hailing from humble background necessary action was not taken and also failed to follow up the same from his counsel. Accordingly, he prayed that the appeal may be remitted back to the Assessing Officer to re-do the assessment with proper facts available on record.

3 | P a g e

ITA No.108/Agr/2026

Order pronounced in the open court on 21.04.2026. Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24.04.2026 *Santosh, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra

4 | P a g e