BALBIR SINGH,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, FATEHABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 61/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 May 2026AY 2012-136 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not verified all the documents and facts presented by the assessee. To ensure natural justice, the case was remanded back to the AO for a fresh adjudication after considering all submissions and evidence.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings based on information about large cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts. The assessee did not respond to notices, leading to an ex-parte assessment where the entire cash deposit was treated as unexplained income. The CIT(A) confirmed part of the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly verified the documents and facts presented by the assessee, and whether the assessment order was passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: CA राजव क ओर से/
Hearing: 27.04.2026Pronounced: 04.05.2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़ �यायपीठ, च�डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 61/CHD/2024 �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Balbir Singh, The ITO, 52, Bhodia Khera, बनाम Ward 1, Fatehabad Fatehabad Vs. Haryana 125050 �थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: MWJPS1746J अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) �नधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज�व क� ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh Anil Kumar Sharma, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 27.04.2026 उदघोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 04.05.2026 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM: Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.12.2023 passed by CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

2.

Grounds of appeal are as under: -

1.

That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CITIA), NPAC in Appeal No. CIT (A), Hisar/10002/2020-21 has erred in passing order u/s 250 dtd.

61-Chd-2024

2 12.12.2023 as the same is in contravention of provisions of s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act"). 2. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the actions of Ld. AO in initiating, continuing and then concluding the impugned assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 and hence the impugned assessment order deserves to be quashed. 3. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition to the extent of Rs. 65,00,000/- made by Ld. AO by erroneously holding cash deposit in bank to be from unexplained sources. 4. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,23,559/- made by Ld. AO in respect of interest income earned by the appellant. 5. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the order passed by Ld. AO and then by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 6. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.

3.

Brief facts of the case, as discussed in the order of Ld. CIT(A), are as under: -

61-Chd-2024

3 4.2.1 Briefly, the facts of the case is that the A.O. was in possession of credible information from Investigation Wing of the Department that during the relevant previous year the appellant has deposited huge amount of cash in bank account as detailed below:

Name of Bank Account No. Total Cash deposits (Rs.) Central Bank of 3125075871 90,30,126 India, Raita Branch Punjab National 650400010000 2,38,44,933 Bank, Bhoria 5984 Khera Branch Total 3,28,75,059

The A.O. issued enquiry letters to the appellant but no reply was received. Subsequently, after obtaining approval from Pr. CIT, reassessment proceedings was initiated by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the I. T. Act dated 29.03.2019 which was sent to the appellant through post on 30.03.2019. It is noted by the A.O. that the appellant failed to file return of income in response to this notice issued. Subsequently notice u/s. 142(1) of the I. T. Act dated 25.07.2019 along with the questionnaire was issued to the appellant. However the A.O. noted that the appellant has not complied with the requirement of this notice issued. The A.O. issued show cause notice dated 04.09.2019 and sent through speed post but the same is received

61-Chd-2024

4 back unserved on 12.09.2019 with postal remark ‘lene se inqar, ateh wapis’. The A.O. therefore on the basis of information gathered, brought to tax the entire cash deposit of Rs.3,27,25,059/- treating it as unexplained income of the appellant for the relevant previous year.

4.

During proceedings before us, it was submitted by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee that the assessment in this case was made u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'), without taking into consideration the details and documents filed by the Assessee. Against that order of the Assessing Officer, the Assessee was in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and he submitted documents / papers before him. The Ld. CIT(A) referred these documents for remand report and on the basis of the remand report and documents filed by the Assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the appellate order wherein, he has confirmed the addition to the extent of Rs. 65 lacs holding cash deposits in bank to be from undisclosed sources. He has also confirmed the addition of Rs. 1,23,559/- in respect of the interest income earned by the Assessee.

61-Chd-2024

5 5. During proceedings before us, ld. Counsel for the Assessee argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has not verified all the documents and he has also failed to appreciate the details filed by the Assessee. Least to say that none of such documents were ever verified by the Assessing Officer during the proceedings before authorities below as the assessment was made u/s 144 of the Act.

6.

Per contra, the ld. DR relied the orders of the authorities below.

7.

We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, remand report and the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order. Although the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a very detailed and speaking order still then it is found that all facts brought on record by the Assessee and documents filed had not been verified by the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, in order to give natural justice to the Assessee, we are inclined to remand this case back to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass a denovo order after taking into consideration all facts and details filed by the Assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing

61-Chd-2024

6 Officer for fresh adjudication de novo on merits, after duly considering the submissions /documents and evidences that may be furnished by the Assessee, as well as the material available on record. Needless to add, the Assessing Officer shall afford adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation in the remand proceedings. All grounds and contentions available under law are kept open. Ordered accordingly.

8.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 04.05.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- ( RAJPAL YADAV ) ( KRINWANT SAHAY) Vice President Accountant Member “आर.के.” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →