BHUSHAN KUMAR,KHANAURI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SUNAM, SANGRUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 931/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh31 October 2025AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without considering the merits of the case. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merit, ensuring a proper opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee contended that the NFAC confirmed the Assessing Officer's order without considering the merits of the case or adjudicating the grounds of appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merit. Whether the assessment proceedings were initiated and conducted in compliance with the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 145(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, A, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 31.10.2025Pronounced: 31.10.2025

Order Per Laliet Kumar, AM: Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.06.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y. 2017-18.

2. Grounds of appeal are as under:

1. That the order of Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax-11 (Appeals) and National

931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 2 Faceless Assessment Centre is against law & facts.

2.

That the Officer was not justified to initiate proceedings u/s 147 on the basis of information from Income Tax Officer ward- 28(1) Delhi and was not justified to issue notice u/s 148 of Income Tax Act without any material on record to establish the quantum of escapement. The escaped income is purely based on cash deposit which does not come into purview of escapement amount without any concrete evidence on record.

1.

3. That Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was erred in law to dismiss appeal only on ground of non-attendance appellant 3 proceedings without considering the merit of case. The Commission of Income Tax (Appeals) just accepted the finding without any independent enquiry of fact of case.

4. That the Officer of National Faceless Assessment Centre passed the order u/s 147 read with section 144B without complying the specific provisions with regard to issue of show cause notice and draft order. No response to show cause considered during the assessment proceedings.

5.

That notice u/s 148 was wrongly issued with regard to quantum of escapement. The information received pertains to escaped amount of Rs.88,50,000.00 (1,08,70,00,00- 20,20,000.00) 5 whereas total cash deposit assessed as income of Rs.63,39,590.00 which includes Rs.20,20,000.00 as cash

1.

931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 3 deposit during specified period. So the alleged escapement amount as per facts is wrongly determined.

6.

That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) & Officer of National Faceless Assessment Centre was not Justified to assess the alleged amount w/s 69A without considering his own finding of "unexplained in books of account". The provision of section 69A was wrongly invoked as all entries are duly recorded in books of accounts.

7.

That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified to sustain the addition without concluding the facts of deposit and withdrawals in books of account. That all entries 7 pertain to business of appellant. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) even did not consider the cash flow of cash deposit entries which was duly filed during the course of assessment proceedings.

8. That Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified to sustain addition without rejecting books of account U/s 145(3) of Income Tax Act 1961. No addition is called for without rejection of books.

9.

That the appellant craves leave to add OR amend any ground of 9 appeal before the appeal is heard OR dispose off.

931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 4

3.

At the very outset, ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted before the Bench that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

4.

Per contra, Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

5. We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the Assessee for non- prosecution. We are of this considered view that even where the Assessee does not comply to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) should have passed the order on merit on the basis of material available on record. But in the present case, he has confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer without giving his own view and even without adjudicating the different grounds of appeal filed by the Assessee. Therefore, in the fitness of things and keeping in view the natural justice to the Assessee, we are inclined to remand this case back to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merit.

931-Chd-2025 Bhushan Kumar, Khanauri, Punjab 5

6. In view of this, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say, that the ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present his case and to furnish necessary evidences and details. The Assessee is also directed to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when called for and will not contribute in unnecessary delay in the hearing of the appeal.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 31.10.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →