RAJESH KUMAR PAL,GANPURA vs. ITO, RANCHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer, directing that the assessee be given an adequate opportunity to present their case and substantiate their income. The Tribunal noted the assessee's claim that the cash transactions were part of their business as a Banking Correspondent Agent.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a non-filer, was subjected to reassessment under Section 147 based on information about significant cash transactions. The Assessing Officer made additions based on these transactions, and the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, citing a defect in the appeal form.
What were the issues?
Whether the lower authorities provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and whether the cash transactions represented the assessee's unexplained income or business-related remittances.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, A.M.
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)- 1, Gurugram [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 12/01/2026 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. The assessee has mainly challenged the action of the lower authorities that they had decided the appeal of the assessee without affording reasonable and fair opportunity of being heard.
Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is a non-filer of return of income. Subsequently, the case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) for the assessment on the basis of the informat
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.
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
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026