AMIT PRABHUNATH JAISWAL,NERUL WEST vs. ITO WARD 28(1)(1), NAVI MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) cannot dismiss an appeal solely for non-prosecution. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits, with a direction to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal challenging an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal for non-appearance without adjudicating on merits. The CIT(A)'s order was based on the assessee's non-compliance with notices, leading to the dismissal.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating the grounds on merits, and if the matter should be remanded for de novo adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 151,Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 132,Section 153C,Section 69A,Section 142,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 271(1)(c),Section 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) Nagpur v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)159 citing69 Taxmann.com 407 · 2016 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANTSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
Date of Hearing – 30/07/2025 Date of Order - 04/08/2025 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M.
The assessee has filed the present appeal challenging the impugned order dated 14/03/2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2013-14.
2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: -
(A.Y. 2013-14) 2
1. Invalid Approval u/s 151 of the Act the assessment u/s. 147 is invalid. The notice u/s 148 has been issued without proper approval u/s 151 of the Act from CCIT, therefore, the notice issued u/s. 148 of the Act is not a valid notice and hence all further assessment proceedings are invalid.
The Assessment order passed under Sec 147 rws 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is without jurisdiction, void and bad in law. A search under Sec 132 was conducted in the case of M/s. Renuka Mata Multi State Ur. Co-operative Credit Society Ltd on 26/05/2017. The information in respect of my credits in my bank account provided on insight portal. The proceedings have been commenced on the basis of search and material seized in search or post search inquiry in respect of third party, the provisions of sec. 153C of the Act are applicable for assessment in the case of third party, this excludes the application of sections 147 and 148 of the Act and hence the notice issued under sec.148 and proceedings under sec.147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 are illegal and void ab initio. Thus, the order passed by the learned AO u/s. 147 ws 144 is not valid liable to be quashed.
Legality of assessment order u/s 147. i) The learned Assessing Officer has erred in invoking the provisions of Explanation 2(a) of sec 147 instead Explanation 2(ca) of sec 147 of the Act for reasons recorded, when information received by A.O. from DCIT Central Circle 4(4) Mumbai. ii) The provisions of sec 153C provides that persons relating to whom some material is found in search or post search inquiry of some other person shall be assessed under sec 153C of the Act and reasons shall be recorded under Explanation 2(ca) of sec 147 of the Act. iii) The approval of higher authorities under sec 151 on wrong forming reason to believe and details of escapement of income in respect of Cash deposit & invoking Sec 69A Explanation 2(a) of sec 147 instead Explanation 2(ca) of sec 147 of the Act and subsequently the notice issued u/s. 148 on such invalid approval is void. iv) The notice issued under Sec 148 and proceedings under Explanation 2(a) of Sec 147 is void ab initio and assessment order passed under section 147 rws. 144 is bad in law which may kindly be quashed. v) The assessing officer has not independently applied his mind to the facts of this case and has merely relied upon information received on insight portal by AO of search party which amounts to borrowed satisfaction, which is impermissible in the eyes of the law and therefore the addition needs to be deleted in the interest of equity and justice. Thus, the assessment order passed by the learned AO is not valid, which may kindly be quashed.
4. Whether the reasons recorded without verifying my bank statement in detail in respect of credits and subsequent debits is a valid reason for Sec 147 of the Act.
Legality of Assessment Order passed in violation of Principles of Natural Justice. (A.Y. 2013-14) 3 The learned Assessing Officer has passed the Assessment Order without confronting the detailed information in respect of credits in my bank account in pursuant to Sec 142 (2) which has utilized in the assessment 147 of the IT Act, 1961. Thus, the assessment order passed by the learned AO is violation of principle of natural justice is not valid, which may kindly be quashed.
The learned Assessing Officer has grievously erred in law and on facts in invoking provisions of Sec. 234A & 234B of the Act and imposed interest towards late filing of retur of income Sec. 234A at Rs. 1509858/- & Sec 234B for default for payment of advance tax at Rs. 14821380/- without providing an opportunity of hearing so that there is gross violation of principles of natural justice. There, interest levied us 234A & 234B of the I.T. Act, 1961 may kindly be deleted.
Addition u/s. 69A of the Act at Rs. 22390154/-. The learned AO has not justified in making addition u/s. 69A of the Act at Rs. 22390154/- ignoring the fact there is regular withdrawals of cash from account and no Lum sum cash deposit or credits in my account, there is also recycle of cash withdrawals and redeposit in account. Thus, addition made treating entire cash deposit or credits in my account is my income may kindly be deleted.
Whether the learned Assessing Officer has not justified in levying tax @ 60% treating credits in my bank account is income for the year under appeal, when the said provisions have been introduced w.e.f. 01/04/2017. Thus, tax levied @ 60% treating cash credit at Rs. 22390154/- is my unexplained income u/s 69A of the Act may kindly be deleted.
Penalty Proceedings. Whether the learned A.O. has justified in initiating penalty proceedings us 271(1) (c) without satisfying under which limb the penalty proceedings has been initiated, therefore, the penalty proceedings initiated is not valid, which may kindly be dropped. Thus, the notice issued for concealed the particulars of income is not valid, which may kindly be dropped.”
3. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. In the present case, at the outset, it is evident that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte due to the non- appearance of/on behalf of the assessee. We further find that the learned CIT(A) merely on the basis of non-compliance with notices, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee on merits, as required under section 250(6) of the Act. We find that (A.Y. 2013-14) 4 in CIT v/s Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF), reported in [2016] 69 taxmann.com 407 (Bombay), the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court held that the Commissioner (Appeals) cannot dismiss the appeal on account of non- prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. Consequently, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of the appeal on merits. We further direct that no order shall be passed without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties. The assessee is directed to appear before the learned CIT(A) on all the hearing dates as may be fixed without any default. As the matter is being restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, the other grievances raised by the assessee in the present appeal do not call for adjudication at this stage. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/08/2025
More judgments on Section 151
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Rajesh Kumar Khandelwal, Jaipur vs ITO Ward 5(1), JaipurITA 21/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026