VIMLA BANJARE, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-4(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 439/RPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 June 2026AY 2011-124 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Appeals) erred by not complying with Rule 46A(3) and not calling for a remand report on the additional evidence. The order of the CIT(Appeals) was set aside due to arbitrariness.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 144/147 of the Act, treating cash deposits of Rs. 11,62,000/- as unexplained due to the assessee's non-compliance and failure to file a return. The CIT(Appeals) rejected additional evidence submitted by the assessee without following Rule 46A(3) of the IT Rules.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) properly considered the additional evidence submitted by the assessee and complied with the procedural requirements of the IT Rules and Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 250(4),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 17.06.2026Pronounced: 18.06.2026

आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM

The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Chandigarh dated 31.03.2026 for the assessment year 2011-12 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

In this case the assessment is completed under Section 144/147 of the Act. The observation of the A.O. are as follows:

“Since this is a time barring case and in absence of any compliance from the assessee, and in this circumstances the undersigned has no other alternative but to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the L.T.Act, 1961 as per the information available with the department. 2. As per the reasons recorded for re-opening of the case by the AO and the same was approved by the PCIT-2, Raipur. The assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs. 11,62,000/-and has not filed any return of income Since the assessee has not filed any return of income for the year under consideration, hence the income of the assessee is taken at Rs. 11,62,000/- as per the reasons as discussed above. Assessed and taxable income Rs. 11,62,000/- 3. In absence of any compliance from the assessee the assessment is completed u/s 144 read with section 147 of the I.T.Act, 1961 i.e. ex-parte on the basis of information available with the system. The Income of the assessee is assessed at Rs. 11,62,000/- Penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b)/271 F for not compliance of statutory notices and for not filing return of income within due date AY 2013-14 is separately initiated. Assessed u/s 144/147 of the I.T.Act, 1961 on a net taxable income of Rs. 11,62,000/-. Allow credit for prepaid taxes as per evidences available. Initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b)/271F of the I.T.Act, 1961.”

3 Vimla Banjare Vs. ITO ITA No.439/RPR/2026

3.

That when the matter went up before the CIT(A) it is observed from Para 6.3 wherein certain additional evidences had been furnished by the assessee. The CIT(A) summarily rejected this additional evidences and had not complied with the dictate of Rule 46A(3) of the I.T. Rules 1962. That in the relevant para the CIT(A) observed as follows:

“6.3 On merits the Assessing Officer has treated the entire cash deposits of Rs. 11,62,000/- as unexplained. During the appellate proceedings the appellant has furnished certain explanations in respect of part of the deposits including gifts and a cash flow statement. However, the evidences furnished are not found to be satisfactory in establishing the creditworthiness of the donors and genuineness of the transactions. The explanations are general in nature and not supported by reliable and verifiable documentary evidence particularly in respect of actual movement of funds and financial capacity of the alleged donors. The cash flow statement is also self-serving and does not conclusively explain the source of deposits.” 4. The CIT(A) was bound by the provisions of law to comply with Rule 46A(3) of the I.T. Rules 1962, to call for a remand report from the A.O. on the genuineness of these additional evidences furnished by the assessee explaining the source and nature of the cash deposits of Rs. 11,62,000/-. The very basis of addition by the A.O. was that the said amount remained unexplained in the hands of the assessee. Now at the appellate stage before the CIT(A) the assessee had tried to explain the source of such cash deposit and therefore as the quasi-judicial authority the CIT(A) should have complied with the provisions of law so to arrive at correct findings. That without considering these evidences and summarily dismissing the appeal of the assessee tantamounts to arbitrariness and such order is vitiated. In

4 Vimla Banjare Vs. ITO ITA No.439/RPR/2026

view thereof maintaining the scales of justice the order of CIT(A) is set-aside and the matter is restored back to his file to comply with Rule 46A(3) of the I.T. Rules, 1962 regarding the additional evidences and come up with a speaking order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act. The assessee shall also comply with the hearing notices from the office of the CIT(A)/NFAC.

5.

As per above terms, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 18th day of June, 2026.

Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; �दनांक / Dated : 18th June, 2026. Tanmay, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक-सद�य” ब�च, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Raipur. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5.

आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →