UMESH CHANDER RAI,KARIMUDDINPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GHAZIPUR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VARANASI BENCH, VARANASI BEFORE SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.129/VNS/2025 A.Y. 2015-16 Umesh Chander Rai, vs. Income Tax Officer Mohammadabad, District-Ghazipur, Uttar Pradesh PAN: AORPR9227D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Sh. Sudipta Paul, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 06.08.2026 Date of pronouncement: 31.08.2026 O R D E R PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC dated 6.12.2024, wherein the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee filed against the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2015-16 dated 13.03.2023. The grounds of appeal are as under: - “1- Because ex-parte appellate order passed by learned CIT (Appeals) is bad in law as well as on facts and liable to be cancelled. 2- Because learned CIT (Appeals) passed the appellate order without giving proper opportunity to the appellant. Appellant was ill also on hearing date of appeal. 3- Because learned CIT (Appeals) passed appellate order without considering Bank Account, Cash Book, Balance sheet and documentary evidences submitted along with appeal. Deposit in Bank are from sale of top ups and coupons of Vodafone. Appellant derives income from commission and rebate received from Vodafone through purchase and sale of recharge coupon and

ITA No. 129/VNS/2025 Umesh Chander Rai A.Y. 2015-16 top ups. Net profit of appellant is Rs.232245/. Which is below the taxable limit minimum. Learned C.I.T. (Appeals) passed the ex-parte appellate order without considering the facts available on record and giving proper opportunity to the appellant. 4- Because appellant craves leave to add, to alter or to appeal before the appeal is heard and disposed of. 5- Because appellant order passed by learned CIT (Appeals) is based on Imagination and summaries and liable to be cancelled.”

ITA No. 129/VNS/2025 Umesh Chander Rai A.Y. 2015-16 assessee had not filed a return of income. The ld. Assessing Officer also observed that the assessee had received commission of Rs. 1,80,901/- from various mobile companies. Accordingly, he came to the conclusion that income of the assessee had escaped assessment and after taking the necessary approvals, he issued a notice under section 148 to the assessee and thereafter initiated proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The ld. Assessing Officer records the fact that the assessee did not make compliance to any of the notices issued by him. He, therefore, decided to bring the escaped income to tax in a best judgment manner and accordingly assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 1,33,83,729/-. 4. The assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). In the statement of facts, it was submitted that the assessee derived commission income and rebate through sale purchase of Vodafone top ups and coupons and also had interest income. All the deposits in the bank were on account of business with Vodafone of recharge coupons and top ups. The net profit of the assessee was Rs. 2,32,245/- which was below the minimum taxable limit. No income had been concealed, the deposits in the bank were proved through account books and that there was no concealment of income. The ld. Assessing Officer had passed the ex parte assessment order, without giving proper opportunity to the assessee and the facts available on record. The assessee was ill during the period as shown in the assessment order. The ld. CIT(A) also recorded the fact that he gave various opportunities to the assessee to file responses in support of the grounds of appeal, but none of these were complied with. He, therefore, concluded that the assessee was not interested in pursuing his appeal and accordingly he decided not to offer further opportunities to the assessee but rather to complete the proceedings on the basis of the materials already on record. He noted that the assessee

ITA No. 129/VNS/2025 Umesh Chander Rai A.Y. 2015-16 had not offered any explanations for the cash deposits of Rs. 1,31,72,100/- added back under section 69A, the interest income of Rs. 30,728/- and the contractual receipts of Rs. 1,80,901/- and therefore, he upheld all these additions and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The assessee is aggrieved at the dismissal of his first appeal and has accordingly come before us in appeal. On the appointed day of hearing, nobody was present on behalf of the assessee to argue the case. However, ongoing through the statement of facts and grounds of appeal, we note that the assessee has submitted that he is a commission agent who receives income and commission through sale and purchase of Vodafone top ups and the entire deposits in the bank account are on account of the business of recharge coupons and top ups of Vodafone. The assessee has also submitted that he is actually not assessable to tax as his total income is only Rs. 2,32,245/- which is below the minimum taxable limit amount. We noticed from a perusal of Form No. 35 that the assessee claims to be able to verify this contention with reference to his day to day register and the account books. He claims to have submitted a copy of the bank account, cash book, balance-sheet and documentary evidences alongwith the appeal memo to the ld. CIT(A) and has taken the ground that the ld. CIT(A) has decided the matter without considering these evidences. 6. On the other hand, Sh. Sudipta Paul, Sr. DR (hereinafter referred to as the DR) arguing the matter on behalf of the Revenue argued that the assessee had not made compliance at any level and therefore, it should be held that the assessee had no explanation to offer with regard to the deposits made in the bank account. He accordingly prayed that the same may be confirmed.

ITA No. 129/VNS/2025 Umesh Chander Rai A.Y. 2015-16 7. We have duly considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the versions of both the parties. The essential dispute revolves around the nature of the deposits in the said bank account. The Department holds the same to unexplained under section 69A while the assessee has submitted that these fully explained on account of sale of Vodafone top ups and recharge coupons, for whom he was a commission agent. He also claims to have maintained books of account to establish this. We are of the opinion that the veracity of the assessee’s claims can be verified with reference to the debit entries in his bank account and after enquiries made with M/s Vodafone India, on whose behalf the assessee claims to be active. After considering that the facts have not been examined at any stage, albeit due to the non-compliance by the assessee, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for examining the nature of the cash deposits in the aforesaid bank account. The assessee is directed to furnish all the evidence in his possession to demonstrate to the ld. Assessing Officer that the deposits in the said bank account are explained out of the sale of Vodafone recharge coupons and top ups. The ld. Assessing Officer may consider these evidences and thereafter the decide the issue on the basis of same. We note that were the contentions of the assessee to be accepted in the restored proceedings, the remaining income of the assessee would be below taxable limits and therefore, we do not believe it necessary to record if any finding regarding the escapement of commission interest income for the present, leaving it for the ld. Assessing Officer to determine after a decision is arrived at on the nature of the deposits in the aforesaid bank account with the Bank of India. Accordingly, the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

ITA No. 129/VNS/2025 Umesh Chander Rai A.Y. 2015-16 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Orders pronounced on 31.08.2026 in the open Court.

Sd/- Sd/- [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] [NIKHIL CHOUDHARY] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 31/08/2026 sh Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant – 2. Respondent – 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. CIT, 5. The CIT(A) By order Sr. P.S.