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

ITA 522/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 September 2026AY 2019-201 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee was absent and had filed an adjournment application. The Revenue's representative was present and argued the case. The Tribunal observed that the assessee had not filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The Department had information regarding cash deposits of Rs.36,89,132/- and interest income of Rs.36,20,226/-, which led to the reopening of the assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. Since the assessee did not present its case or offer any arguments against the reopening, and the Revenue had provided a basis for the reopening, the Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the proceedings initiated by the Revenue. The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Civil Diploma Engineers Sangh, appealed against an order dated 23.03.2026 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The assessee failed to file its return of income for the relevant year. The Income Tax Department possessed information indicating that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.36,89,132/- in its bank account with the Central Bank of India and had also received interest of Rs.36,20,226/- on Fixed Deposits. Based on this information, the Income Tax Department initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was valid, considering the assessee had not filed a return of income for the Assessment Year 2019-20. Assessee's contentions: The judgment records that the assessee was absent and had filed an adjournment application. No specific arguments were made by the assessee. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue contended that the reopening was justified as the assessee had failed to file its return of income, and the Department had information regarding significant cash deposits and interest income received by the assessee, which indicated escapement of income.

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 →