SHUBHAM SHUKLA,RAEBARELI UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO-1, RAEBARELI NEW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 246/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 April 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee should be given an opportunity to represent their case on merits. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the assessment was restored to the AO for fresh assessment after giving due opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal challenges the CIT(A)'s confirmation of additions made by the AO to the tune of Rs. 75,21,800. The assessee argued that adequate opportunity of hearing was not provided and requested a remand. The AO had also provided multiple opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied adequate opportunity of hearing by the lower authorities. Whether the income should be assessed under Section 44AD.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44AD

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “B”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 29.12.2025, pertaining to the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. C.I.T., (Appeals), Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, has legally erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO while sustaining the entire deposit (business receipt) confirming the additions made by the Ld. Assessing Officer to the tune of Rs. 75,21,800.00. 1-(a) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. C.I.T., L National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, has erred in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. while not giving the adequate opportunity red the entire addition. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. C.I.T., (Appeals), Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, has erred in confirming the & Ld. A.O. while not appreciating that the appellant was in trading as such

ITA No.246/LKW/2026 Page 2 of 3 his income should be assessed on the basis of statutory of section 44 AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The appellant craves right to add, amend, alter, modify, substitute any or all of « appeals on or before the time of hearing.” 2. Apropos to the grounds of appeal, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the impugned order has been passed without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He further submitted that in the interest of natural justice, the matter may be remanded back. It was further submitted that even before the Assessing Authority, there was no representation on behalf of the assessee. Thus, Ld. Counsel prayed that the matter may be remanded back to AO.

3.

On the other hand, the Ld. the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) opposed the submissions and submitted that the assessee has been throughout negligent and the assessee cannot be allowed to take advantage of his own negligence.

4.

Heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. It is seen that the Ld. CIT(A) had granted three opportunities to the assessee within a short span of time. Similarly, the Assessing Officer had also provided multiple opportunities of small span. Looking to the facts and material available on record, we are of the considered view that the assessee should be given opportunity to represent his case on merits. We, therefore, in all fairness and in the interest of substantive justice hereby set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment to the file of the Assessing Officer to frame assessment afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed not to seek adjournment without any reasonable cause.

ITA No.246/LKW/2026 Page 3 of 3 The grounds raised in the appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 29/04/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] [KUL BHARAT] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DATED: 29/04/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard File

// True Copy//

More judgments on Section 44AD

All 2,222 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44AD →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →