MUKESH KUMAR RATHORE ,BETUL vs. ITO, BETUL

आदेश/ O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 02.07.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 21.02.2023 passed by learned Assessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2018-19, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds:

Page 1 of 5

Mukesh Kumar Rathore ITA No. 657/Ind/2024 - AY 2018-19

1.The Ld. AO was not justified in passing the order, which is bad-in-law, void ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. 2.The Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the order, which is bad-in-law, void ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. 3.The ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,12,84,911/- without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 4.The appellant carves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal.” 2. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the

assessee-individual did not file return of income for AY 2018-19. The AO, on

the basis of information available in Insight Portal of Income-tax Department

regarding cash deposits of Rs. 66,77,610/- made in Bank A/c during the

previous year 2017-18 relevant to AY 2018-19, adopted the procedure of

section 148A and re-opened assessee’s case u/s 147 through notice dated

31.03.2022 u/s 148 calling the assessee to file return within 30 days. In

response, the assessee filed return on 30.04.2022 declaring a total income

of Rs. 5,42,840/- [Para 3 of assessment-order]. Thereafter, the AO issued

various notices u/s 143(2)/142(1) on different dates out of which initial

notices dated 28.09.2022 & 22.11.2022 remained uncompiled by assessee;

the notice dated 08.12.2022 was partly complied by assessee; and

adjournment request was filed in response to notice dated 16.12.2022.

Thereafter, the AO issued final show-cause notice dated 06.01.2023 which

remained uncompiled by assessee. Then, the AO collected bank statements

Page 2 of 5

Mukesh Kumar Rathore ITA No. 657/Ind/2024 - AY 2018-19

from concerned bank u/s 133(6) and came to know about total credits of Rs.

1,12,84,911/- in the bank a/cs of assessee during the relevant year.

Accordingly, the AO framed assessment u/s 144 after making an addition of

Rs. 1,12,84,911/- on account of unexplained income u/s 69A to the

returned income and thereby assessing total income at Rs. 1,18,27,751/-.

Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal.

2.1 During first-appeal, the assessee made submissions to CIT(A) which

are duly re-produced in Para 2 and 4 of impugned order by CIT(A). However,

the CIT(A) rejected assessee’s submission and upheld AO’s order. Now, the

assessee has come before us in next appeal.

impugned order wherein the assessee’s submission is re-produced by CIT(A).

It was submitted by assessee to CIT(A) (i) that he was engaged in trading of

vegetables in Krishi Mandi, Betul; (ii) that he filed return of income in

response to notice u/s 148 on the basis of information available with him;

(iii) that the password of email id to which notices were sent by AO was lost

and the assessee updated new email id on income-tax portal but the AO

continued to send notices to old email id; and (iv) that during the period of

proceedings by AO, he was also suffering from mental depression and

Page 3 of 5

Mukesh Kumar Rathore ITA No. 657/Ind/2024 - AY 2018-19

medical complications such as anxiety and diabetics and taking continuous

treatment [the medical prescriptions and laboratory reports were filed to

CIT(A)]. Therefore, the assessee could not pay proper attention to the

proceedings and could not be diligent in checking the proceedings, if any,

conducted by AO and make submissions to AO. However, the assessee has

compiled/collected all details/documents and ready to represent its case

before AO. Therefore, having regard to the difficult position of assessee and

in the interest of justice, one more opportunity may be given to assessee to

make representation before AO and for this purpose, the case may be

restored to the file of AO.

remanding this case to the file of AO but makes a request to direct the

assessee to represent his case before AO and do not seek unnecessary

adjournments.

to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit to remand this

matter back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh, at the risk and

responsibility of assessee. The AO shall give necessary opportunity of

hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his

Page 4 of 5

Mukesh Kumar Rathore ITA No. 657/Ind/2024 - AY 2018-19

earlier order. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the

hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments

failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in

accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

Order pronounced in open court on 28/04/2025

Sd/- Sd/-

(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Indore

िदनांक/Dated : 28/04/2025

Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 5 of 5