CIVIL DIPLOMA ENGINEERS SANGH VIBHAG UTTAR PRADESH ,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(1) LUCKNOW-NEW, LUCKNOW

ITA 522/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 September 2026AY 2019-201 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed an adjournment application and did not present any arguments. The appeal was filed against the order of the NFAC dated 23.03.2026 for AY 2019-20. The brief facts indicate that the assessee had not filed its return of income, and the Department had information about cash deposits of Rs. 36,89,132/- and interest income of Rs. 36,20,226/-, leading to reopening under Section 147. Since the assessee did not appear or present any submissions, the Tribunal was unable to adjudicate on the merits of the case. The appeal was therefore dismissed for non-prosecution. No specific finding was made on the validity of the reopening or the merits of the income assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Civil Diploma Engineers Sangh, failed to file its return of income for Assessment Year 2019-20. The Income Tax Department possessed information indicating cash deposits totaling Rs. 36,89,132/- in the assessee's bank account with Central Bank of India and interest income of Rs. 36,20,226/- on Fixed Deposits. Consequently, the case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The appeal is against the order dated 23.03.2026, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC). The assessee was represented by an adjournment application, while the respondent was represented by Shri Sudhakar Shukla, DR.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is valid, considering the information available to the Assessing Officer. The Assessee did not present any arguments as they filed an adjournment application. The Revenue, through Shri Sudhakar Shukla, DR, likely contended that the reopening was justified based on the information regarding cash deposits and interest income, which indicated escapement of income. The Revenue would have argued that the conditions for reopening under Section 147 were met, necessitating the assessment proceedings to bring the undisclosed income to tax.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Shukla, D.R

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 23.03.2026, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2019-20. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed the return of income for the year under consideration. The Income Tax Department was in possession of information that the assessee had made cash deposits aggregating to Rs.36,89,132/- in its bank account maintained with Central Bank of India and received interest of Rs.36,20,226/- on Fixed Deposits. On the basis of this information, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act,

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 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →