ITO WARD-5 AMRAVATI, AMRAVATI vs. SHRI AKHILESH SAMARSINGH YADAV, AMRAVATI

PER KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, AM: 1. The revenue has filed the aforesaid appeal challenging the impugned order dated 08/01/2025, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), [“learned CIT(A) NFAC], for the assessment year 2017-18. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The Ld. CIT(A) had erred on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, in setting aside the assessment order as per the provision of section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the assessee responsive during the course of assessment proceedings.

ITA177/Nag/2025 (A.Y. 2017–18) Shri Akhilesh Samarsingh Yadav 2. Any other ground that may be raised during the course of appellate proceedings.” 2. We have heard the submissions of both the parties and perused the record and orders of lower authorities. At the outset of hearing the ld Counsel for the assessee submits that against the order of ld CIT(A) dated 08.01.2025, the assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal, which was registered vide ITA No. 85/Nag/2025. The assessee in his appeal challenged the additions on merit. The Tribunal after hearing the submissions of both the parties has allowed the appeal of assessee in deleting the entire additions. Thus, the appeal of revenue is not maintainable and has become infructuous. The ld Counsel for the assessee also filed copy of decision of Tribunal dated 14.05.2025 in ITA No. 85/Nag/2025. 3. Before us, Sr. DR for the revenue in all fairness has conceded to the above view. 4. We have considered the submissions of the parties and find that order of the CIT(A) dated 08.01.2025,was challenged before Tribunal vide ITA No. 85/Nag/2025, wherein the Tribunal passed the following order; “14. Per-contra, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that when the matter has been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh verification, in that event, the assessee need not be aggrieved. He accordingly prayed to dismiss the appeal being infructuous.

ITA177/Nag/2025 (A.Y. 2017–18) Shri Akhilesh Samarsingh Yadav 15. We have heard the arguments of rival parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below and duly considered the facts of the case in the light of settled legal position and the case laws relied upon by the assessee. It is admitted fact that the assessee has maintained regular books of account and turnover of the above than prescribed limit. The assessee has filed the same along with return of income and also submitted copy of audit report in Form 3CB & 3CD along with audited Balance Sheet, Profit & Loss Account with schedule during the course of appellate proceedings, which are placed on record at Page-12 to 23 of the Paper Book. We further note that the assessee is doing the business only on cash basis and has shown the sales day to day basis in books of account, which has not been rejected under section 145(3) of the Act by the authorities below. The cash received by way sale of LPG Cylinders and domestic appliances and regularly deposited in the bank accounts of the assesse and transferred to Indian Oil Corporation through proper banking channel and duly reflected in the books of account of the assessee. We further came to be noticed that the assessee has deposited total cash of ₹ 4,31,40,812, during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 2017-2018 out of which the assessee has deposited amount of ₹ 36,00,110 in its bank account during the period of demonetization. While going through the Gazette Notification relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee, we noticed that the Gazette notification issued by the Government of India in Ministry of Finance, the business of the assessee covered under the essential commodities. The relevant portion of the CBDT Circular is reproduced below :-

ITA177/Nag/2025 (A.Y. 2017–18) Shri Akhilesh Samarsingh Yadav “(e) for purchase of petrol, diesel and gas at the stations operating under the authorization of Public Sector Oil Marketing Companies”.

ITA177/Nag/2025 (A.Y. 2017–18) Shri Akhilesh Samarsingh Yadav undisclosed business income. Accordingly, grounds no. 2 to 6 are allowed.” 5. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking into consideration the decisions rendered by the Coordinate bench of this Tribunal, wherein the assessee is allowed full relief, thus, appeal by the department has become infructuous since the order of Ld. CIT(A) has now lost its efficacy, particularly since superior forum has overturned the same. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 20.04.2026 under Rule 34 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) rules 1963

Sd/- sd/- PAWAN SINGH KHETTRA MOHAN ROY JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 20/04/2026 KRK, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. By order

Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur