TANU PRASAD PHUKAN ,NAZIRA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT (NAFAC), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 270/GTY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 March 2026AY 2018-20193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the additions were made on account of money received by the assessee from retirement benefits. It was of the opinion that the issue required further verification at the end of the Assessing Officer. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the Assessing Officer. The AO was directed to decide the case afresh after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. No specific issue was left undecided, as the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Tanu Prasad Phukan, filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal concerned additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of various Fixed Deposits (FDRs) and other deposits. The assessee contended that these deposits were made from retirement benefits received by him. The assessee claimed that all evidence regarding these retirement benefits was furnished to the AO and CIT(A) but was overlooked. The assessee requested one more opportunity to explain the case on merits before the AO. The Revenue's representative conceded that the assessee could be granted another opportunity.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the additions made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A) on account of FDRs and other deposits, which were allegedly out of retirement benefits, are sustainable in law? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the additions were made on account of FDRs and other deposits that were legitimately sourced from retirement benefits received by him. He contended that all necessary evidence to substantiate this claim was provided to the AO and CIT(A), but these submissions were overlooked. The assessee sought a further opportunity to present his case on merits before the AO. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's representative fairly conceded that the assessee could be granted one more opportunity to explain his case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM

For Appellant: Shri S.S.B. Baruah, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sipak Singh, DR
Hearing: 09.03.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 25.07.2025 for the AY 2018-19.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the addition made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) are on account of various FDRs and other deposits by the assessee which were admittedly out of retirement benefits received by the assessee upon retirement. The ld. AR stated that all the evidences qua the retirement benefits received were furnished before the ld. AO as well as before the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), however,

3.

The ld. DR on the other hand fairly conceded that the assessee may be granted one more opportunity.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we are of the view that the additions were made towards money which the assessee has received out of the retirement benefits. In our opinion, the issue needs verification at the end of the ld. AO and consequently, we restore the appeal to the file of the ld. AO with a direction to decide the same after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →