SANDEEP KUMAR,MAINPURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MAINPURI

ITA 569/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra01 October 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sandeep Kumar, is an individual and a non-filer for Assessment Year 2018-19. Reassessment proceedings were initiated based on information regarding cash withdrawals of Rs. 1,17,36,500/- and cash deposits of Rs. 15,000/- in Axis Bank. A notice under Section 148 was issued on March 28, 2023. The assessee did not file a return in response. Statutory notices under Section 142(1) and a show cause notice were also issued, to which the assessee did not respond. The Assessing Officer added the total amount of cash withdrawal and deposit, Rs. 1,17,51,500/-, to the assessee's total income as unexplained money under Section 69A, vide an assessment order dated March 10, 2023, passed under Sections 147/144 r.w.s 144B. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted the additional evidence filed by the assessee, which included the debtors ledger account, profit and loss account, and balance sheet for the financial year 2017-18. The Tribunal found these documents to be relevant and material to the issue involved in the appeal. However, it noted that these documents required verification. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was directed to verify the additional evidence, afford an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and then pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with the law. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the impugned order was set aside. The issue of whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition without a reasonable opportunity of hearing was implicitly addressed by the remand for fresh verification and hearing.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,17,51,500/- under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing and without appreciating the evidence and submissions? (Mixed question of law and fact, turning on Section 69A and principles of natural justice). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the learned CIT(A) confirmed the addition without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing and without appreciating the evidence and submissions. The assessee also sought to admit additional evidence, including the debtors ledger account, profit & loss account, and balance sheet for the relevant financial year 2017-18, stating they were relevant and material, and their non-filing earlier was due to lack of proper diligence. The assessee relied on their paper book (pages 91-95). Revenue's contentions: The revenue argued that the assessee failed to file the additional evidence before the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A), and therefore, it should not be admitted at this stage. The revenue prayed to reject the assessee's application for admitting additional evidence and supported the impugned order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 142(1),Section 148,Section 29

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (DB

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Shobhit Jain, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 29.09.2026Pronounced: 29.09.2026

PER: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, J.M.

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 08.07.2026 passed in appeal No NFAC/2017-18/10558223 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/NFAC (Delhi) [(hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2018-19, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal.

2.

According to the facts of the case, the assessee is a non-filer. The reassessment proceedings were initiated against the assessee on the basis of the information that the assessee made cash withdrawal of Rs. 1,17,36,500/- and cash deposit of Rs. 15,000/- to and from Axis Bank respectively during the year under consideration. Assessee’s case was reopened by issuan

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 69A

All 15,187 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →