BHARAT LAL GUPTA,BHADOHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(5), BHADOHI, BHADOHI

ITA 39/VNS/2025Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi31 August 2026AY 2017-187 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) on liberal grounds, noting the assessee's claim of illness. The Tribunal found that the assessee, due to non-compliance and lack of awareness of notices, could not present facts to the AO or CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 against the assessee for AY 2017-18, alleging escaped income due to substantial cash deposits in a bank account without filing a return. The assessee failed to respond to notices, leading the AO to make an addition under Section 69A. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a significant delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on grounds of limitation, and whether the cash deposits constituted unexplained credits under Section 69A without proper verification.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 246,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VARANASI “DB”BENCH, VARANASI

Before: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA & SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY

For Respondent: Shri Deepak Yadav, Sr. DR
Hearing: 04.08.2026Pronounced: 31.08.2026

PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre, dated 12.12.2024, wherein the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee against the order passed by learned Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the AY 2017-18 dated 29.03.2022. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“1. That on facts and in law, the order passed by the learned CIT(A), to the extent prejudicial to the appellant, is bad in law and liable to be quashed. Bharat Lal Gupta

2.

That on facts and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →