DEEPANSHU,. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 46(5), DELHI, .

ITA 4640/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 March 2026AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not file submissions before the lower authorities despite opportunities, leading to an ex-parte assessment by the AO and dismissal of the appeal by the NFAC for non-prosecution. However, considering that the NFAC dismissed the appeal without hearing the assessee and the AO completed the assessment ex-parte, the Tribunal, in the interest of justice, decided to restore the issue to the file of the AO. The AO was directed to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue based on facts and law. The assessee was also directed to appear before the AO and cooperate in the proceedings. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes. No specific finding was made on the merits of the disallowance of cash deposits or the procedural fairness of the notice serving, as the matter was remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Deepanshu, filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 30-10-2023, which upheld an assessment order dated 21-12-2019 passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 46(5), Delhi, under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessment year in question is 2017-18. The assessee had declared a total income of Rs. 4,46,370/-. The assessment was selected for limited scrutiny due to cash deposits. Despite notices under Section 143(2) and a summons under Section 131, the assessee did not furnish the required purchase and sales bills. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex-parte, making an addition of Rs. 1,83,68,052/-. The NFAC dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. NFAC erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 1,83,68,052/- made by the AO on account of total cash deposit during the year, without considering the bank statement and income from Arhati (commission agent)? (Question of law and fact, concerning Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961). 2. Whether the Ld. NFAC erred in not making efforts to serve notice to the assessee-appellant on finding no response on notices sent on the ITBA Portal, due to the assessee's change of accountant and unavailability of login credentials? (Question of law and fact, concerning procedural fairness). 3. Whether the Ld. NFAC failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer did not allow a proper opportunity to the assessee to produce evidence, leading to an ex-parte assessment under Section 144, despite the assessee's appearance during the assessment proceedings? (Question of law and fact, concerning procedural fairness and Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contentions: Sufficient opportunity of being heard was not provided by the lower authorities. The Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The Assessing Officer made an ex-parte assessment without allowing proper opportunity to produce evidence. Revenue's Contentions: The Ld. NFAC passed a reasoned order. The assessee was non-cooperative and did not furnish details asked by the AO. The appeal was rightly dismissed by the Ld. NFAC.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 143(2),Section 131

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”, DELHI

Before: AND

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Rajiv Saxena, Adv, Adv. Ms. Sumangla Saxena, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11/02/2026Pronounced: 18/03/2026

PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi [hereinafter vide order dated 30-10-2023

referred to as pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18

short ‘the Act’.

“Ld. NFAC)’

arising out the assessment order

dated, 21-12-2019 u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in under:

1.

That the Ld. NFAC has grossly erred in law as well as on facts in confirming the disal

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 131

All 4,706 judgments and leading authorities on Section 131 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →