BAJPAI TRAVELS AND B.T GROUP,LAKHIMPUR vs. ITO-3(4), LAKHIMPUR, LAKHIMPUR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ‘ब’ न्यायपीठ, लखनऊ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW श्री कुल भारत, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री अनादि नाथ मिश्रा, लेखा सिस्य के सिछ BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ ITA No.697/LKW/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bajpai Travels and B. T. v. ITO-3(4) Group Income Tax Officer, C/o CA Sanjay Saxena, 12, Lakhimpur, Lakhimpur- Pratap Enclave, Bisrat (G.T) 262701. Road, Shahjahanpur, Shahjahanpur-242001. PAN:AAQFB7616M अपीलाथी/(Appellant) प्रत्यथी/(Respondent) अपीलाथी कक और से/Appellant by: Shri Parnav Pandey, CA प्रत्यथी कक और से /Respondent by: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date of hearing: 22 04 2026 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date of 28 04 2026 pronouncement: O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 22.08.2025 pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1 That the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the Ld. AO erred on facts and in law in passing ex parte order which is in violation of the principles of natural justice and be set aside. 2. That the basis of initiation of re-assessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s 148 of the I. T. Act, 1961 dated 30.03.2021, its continuation and culmination vide order u/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.03.2022 is bad in law and liable to be cancelled. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the additions made by the Ld. AO amounting to Rs.1,61,66,500/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which

ITA No.697/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 4 is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case and liable to be deleted. 4. That the Ld. AO had erred in law in applying the provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the additions made u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 5. That the appellant firm reserves a right to add/alter/amend/delete any ground of appeal at the time of its hearing.” 2. The facts in brief are that in this case, the assessee did not file its Return of Income (ROI) for the Assessment Year 2017–18. Assessing Officer noted that the information available on the e- portal of Income Tax Department revealed that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.1,58,46,500/- in its bank account maintained with SBI, Lakhimpur Kheri Branch. Accordingly, the case was reopened for assessment u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) and a notice dated 30.03.2017 u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. However, the assessee neither responded to the said notice nor filed any return of income. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) of the Act were also issued from time to time, but there was no compliance on the part of the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was noted that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.1,58,46,500/- and made cash withdrawals of Rs.3,20,000/- in the said bank account. In the absence of satisfactory explanation, the Assessing Officer treated the cash deposits as unexplained money and made an addition of Rs.1,61,66,500/- u/s 69A of the Act. Aggrieved by this, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who also passed ex parte order against the assessee sustaining impugned additions. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

ITA No.697/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 4 in support of his claim. Therefore, he prayed that the matter may be remanded back and the authorities below may be directed to provide adequate opportunity of being heard. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) opposed the submission and supported the orders of the lower authorities. 5. Heard, the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record. Undisputedly, there was no representation on behalf of the assessee before the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, the First Appellate Authority proceeded to sustain the impugned addition. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the appeal has been dismissed on account of non-submissions of the documentary evidences. It is also contended that the assessee would submit the requisite details, if one more opportunity is granted to the assessee. Therefore, considering the totality of facts and interest of substantive justice, we deem it appropriate and expedient to restore these grounds before the Ld. CIT(A) who would decide afresh after making or causing verification of correctness of the claim of the assessee. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28/04/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [अनादि नाथ मिश्रा] [कुल भारत] [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] [KUL BHARAT] लेखा सिस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपाध्यक्ष/VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 28/04/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS)

ITA No.697/LKW/2025 Page 4 of 4