Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) upholding the reopening of assessment and additions made under sections 69A and 69 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's action due to the assessee's failure to provide details regarding cash deposits despite multiple notices.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to submit necessary details before the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). However, to provide an opportunity, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment, with directions for the assessee to provide all documents.
Key Issues
Whether the reopening of assessment is valid and if the additions made under sections 69A and 69 are justified, given the assessee's failure to provide supporting evidence.
Sections Cited
69A, 69, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2014-15.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
1. The order passed by Ld.CIT(A) is against law, equity & justice.
2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding validity of reopening of assessment though reopening of assessment is based on incorrect data.
The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding addition made by the Ld.AO u/s.69A of the Act of Rs.15,04,000/- 4. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding addition made by the AO u/s.69 of the Act on Rs.4,85,455/- 5. The appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal
before final appeal.
3. On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 13.01.2021, 22.02.2022, 15.12.2023, 19.02.2024, 28.03.2024 & 24.04.2024, requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation regarding the source of cash deposits. Despite various notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee failed to submit any submissions/documents. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We also find that the assessee even failed to submit any details/supporting evidence to prove the source of the cash deposit before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of Assessing officer for conducting assessment de-novo, after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 12.08.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 12.08.2025 MV आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy