SADHNA GUPTA,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-5(1), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 667/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 May 2026AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue of the addition to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. This was done to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to present their case and substantiate their explanations.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against an ex-parte assessment order, which included an addition of Rs. 1,60,85,000/- for unexplained bank deposits, was dismissed by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) found the assessee's explanations unsubstantiated based on the remand report.

What were the issues?

Whether the principles of natural justice were violated by not providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to substantiate their claims before the Assessing Officer and CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE- & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, CA

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.

(A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 07.08.2025, for the AY 2014-15. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law as the appellant denies his liability to be reassessed at total income of Rs. 1,63,03,970/- as against the returned income of Rs. 2,18,970/- and accordingly denies his liability to pay tax and interest demanded thereon. 2. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and passed the order and confirming the amount of Rs. 1,63,03,970/-without considering the observations made in the remand report by the Ld. Ao. and also without considering the detailed documents, submissions submitted during the remand report.

I.T.A. No. 667/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2014-15 2

3.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law as the Ld. AO passed the impugned reassessment order without issuance of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore the whole assessment proceedings are void ab initio 4. Because without considering the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,63,03,970/- without going through merits of the case and the submissions filed by the assessee. 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) In this case, assessment order dated 29.03.2022 was passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). This assessment order was passed ex-parte qua the appellant/assessee. In the aforesaid assessment order, an addition of Rs. 1,60,85,000/- was made under section 69A of the Act on account of deposits made in the Bank. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by the CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 07.08.2025, the appeal of assessee was dismissed by the CIT(A) on the ground that the remand report submitted by the Assessing Officer reflected of lack of verifications/investments regarding the explanation offered by the appellant for the source of deposits made in the Bank. The CIT(A) took the view that the assessee’s submissions were unsubstantiated. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 07.08.2025 of the CIT(A).

(C) At the time of hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee pressed ground no. 5 of appeal strongly. He submitted that the Assessing Officer passed the aforesaid assessment order dated 29.03.2022 and also sent remand report to the CIT(A) without providing reasonable opportunity to the

I.T.A. No. 667/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2014-15 3

assessee. He further submitted that the CIT(A) also did not provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the explanation tendered by the assessee. Therefore, he submitted, the issue in dispute regarding addition of Rs. 1,60,85,000/- should be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass denovo assessment 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, and after considering materials on record as well as submissions made at the time of hearing; the impugned appellate order is set-aside, and the dispute regarding aforesaid additions of Rs. 1,60,85,000/- is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass denovo order on this specific issue, in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(D) All the grounds of appeal in the 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 06/05/2026)

Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Vice-President Accountant Member Date: 06/05/2026 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)

I.T.A. No. 667/Lkw/2025 Assessment Year:2014-15 4

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 →