RAJINDER KAUR,AMBALA vs. DCIT-INT-TAX-GURGAON, GURGAON

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. That on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case and in law, it is objected that the assessee is a non-resident Indian and the very foundation of the jurisdiction to make a reassessment u/s.147 is the issue of a valid notice u/s 148 & order 148A and in the present case the alleged notice dated 17/03/2024 issued by the ITO, Ward -2, Ambala not by the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) disregarding the mandatory procedures specified u/s 151A r.w.s 1448 and notification no. 18/2022, dated 29/03/2022, thus the assessee prays that the foundation section 148 notice may kindly be held as defective, accordingly the entire reassessment proceedings including the consequential assessment order deserves to be held as null and void and liable to be quashed. 2. That without prejudice to the grounds of appeal no.1 raised above, it is objected that the assesseee is a non-resident Indian and the very foundation to make reassessment under the Amended Provision is the issue of a valid show cause notice u/s.148A(b) and in the present case the alleged notice dated 12/02/2024 issued by the non jurisdictional ITO, Ward-2, Ambala not by the ITO (International Taxation), accordingly the show cause notice and order u/s.148A(d) including the preliminary jurisdictional notice issued by the ITO, ward -2, Ambala are without jurisdiction, hence the entire reassessment proceedings are null and void ab initio and the consequential reassessment order liable to be quashed. 3. That on facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, it is objected that the DCIT-Int. Tax, Gurgaon concluded the assessment by passing final order u/s.147 r.w.s 144C(13), dated 25/10/2025 without issuing any fresh preliminary jurisdictional notice u/s.148 and assessment completed replying upon the section 148 notice issued by the non jurisdictional ITO, Ward-2, Ambala, thus the jurisdiction assumed by the DCIT-Int. tax, Gurgaon for completion of assessment is invalid and bad in law, accordingly the final reassessment order passed by the DCIT-Int. Tax, Gurgaon may kindly be declared as without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. 4. That on facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, it is objected that the DCIT-Int. Tax-Gurgaon erred in making addition of Rs.1,58,98,000/- and failed to consider that the assessee is non 2

Although the assessee has raised as many as 5 grounds of appeal, sole substantive issue involved pertains to addition of Rs. 1,58,98,000/- made u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment.

Before us, Ld. AR has submitted a copy of the certificate from the bank dated 18.03.2026 wherein the details regarding old FDRs have been furnished and the maturity proceeds of these deposits are stated to be utilised for e-creating of new time deposits during the year. It has further been submitted that the assessee is a housewife, residing in Canada. She had got insurance claim of Euro 7,65,000/- on account of an accident in Italy in the F.Y. 2013-14. Out of this, Rs. 2,17,07,350/- was credited in her NRI account with SBI, Ambala during F.Y. 2014-15 and she made time deposits of Rs. 2,10,00,000/- out of this amount only.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed on record. We note that the Ld. AR has placed on record, a copy of the certificate issued by the SBI, Barara, Ambala branch clearly stating that the FDRs were created in 2017 and 2018 which matured during May and June in 2019, with total maturity amount being Rs. 1,63,73,813/-. Thus, the source of FDRs of Rs. 4

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.