S. S. DIAM PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR
Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k
BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1131/JPR/2024
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18
Ward-7(2),
Jaipur.
LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANCS4042E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Ayush Poddar, C.A.
jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT a lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 23/07/2025
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 10/09/2025
vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.
CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi dated
21.06.2024 passed under section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
“1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 54,35,000/- u/s 69A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 on account of cash deposited in the bank account during the period of demonetization.
S.S. Diam Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.
2
2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,29,48,552/- by applying the 8%
NP rate on entire credit entries in the bank account during the year (except
Rs. 54,35,000/-, for which addition has also made u/s 69A of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 on account of cash deposited in the bank account during the period of demonetization).
Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of the learned Assessing Officer in applying of provisions of section 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961 which are not applicable in the assessee’s case.
The assessee craves your indulgence to add, amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”
1 The assessee also filed an application under Rule 11 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 dated 25.10.2024 requesting admission of following additional grounds which could not be taken at the time of filing appeal :
“Additional Ground No. 1. On the facts and in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making assessment in the hands of the company whereas the same was not in existence as on 31/3/2017, being struck off by R.O.C.
Additional Ground No. 2. On the facts and in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making assessment in the hands of the company despite being made aware that company stood struck off as on 31/3/2017 by the R.O.C.
Additional Ground No. 3. On the facts and in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in not giving the benefit of telescoping of trading addition of Rs. 1,28,48,522/- vis-à-vis addition on account of bank deposits of Rs. 54,35,000/-.
Additional Ground No. 4. S.S. Diam Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.
3
On the facts and in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in making addition on account of G.P. rate of Rs. 1,29,48,522/- and again on application of such income in deposits in bank of Rs. 54,35,000/-.”
In respect of admission of additional grounds taken by the assessee, we have heard the ld. AR as well as the ld. DR on the admission of additional grounds. The additional grounds raised by the assessee are nothing but new legal plea arose out of the orders of the AO/CIT (A) which were under challenge before this Tribunal. The new legal plea does not require investigation into factual aspects before either accepting or rejecting the contentions. The appellant submits that the new plea go to the very basis of assuming juri iction for passing the assessment order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Consequently, as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NTPC vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC) the new plea is admissible. Therefore, the additional grounds raised by the assessee can be adjudicated on the basis of the facts and material available on the assessment record. Thus when the additional grounds are not raising a new issue or plea, then in the facts and circumstances of the case, we admit the additional grounds raised by the assessee for adjudication on merit. S.S. Diam Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. 4 4. Before us, the assessee has further filed an application under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 dated 25.10.2024 requesting admission of additional/supporting evidences as earlier due to struck off of name of the Company from the Register of