SURENDER KUMAR,ALWAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), ALWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 787/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 September 2025AY 2011-12Bench: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had not supported his grounds of appeal with documentary evidence. However, considering the assessee's claim to explain cash deposits and their non-participation, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order upholding an addition of Rs. 7,96,000/- for unexplained cash deposits. The assessee did not appear for the appellate proceedings. The CIT(A) had upheld the addition, having dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the reopening of assessment was bad in law due to non-service of notice u/s 148? Whether the addition for unexplained cash deposits was justified without proper documentary evidence?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC-Bench” JAIPUR

Before: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM

Hearing: 24/09/2025Pronounced: 26/09/2025

Result

10.

As a result, in view of the above discussion, this appeal is disposed of, for statistical purposes and the matter is remitted to Learned CIT(A) for decision of the appeal afresh, after providing another opportunity to the assessment-appellant of being heard.

1.

1. Surender Kumar, Bhiwadi 11. However due to non participation of the assessee in the appellate proceedings, the assessee-appellant is burdened with costs of Rs. 2000/-. The appellant to deposit the said amount of costs in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund” and produce the receipt before Learned CIT(A) before commencement of the proceedings on remand.

1.

File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 26/09/2025.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 26/09/2025 *Santosh आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू The Appellant- Surender Kumar , Bhiwandi 1. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward-1(1), Alwar. 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ Theld CIT 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेजज. त्महपेजतंत

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →