SMT. KARAMJIT KAUR ,PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6 (4), GURDASPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 342/ASR/2023Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 April 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member), SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument challenging the reassessment jurisdiction and the AO's application of mind. The assessee also sought to introduce additional grounds and evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 arises from a CIT(A) order confirming an assessment framed by the AO u/s 144 r.w.s. 147. The AO reopened the case to verify cash deposits, and upon non-response from the assessee, added Rs. 18.16 Lacs as concealed income on a best judgment basis.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and whether the additions made were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 28-09-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 19-11-2019. It could be seen that Ld. AO reopened the case of the assessee to verify the cash deposits. The assessee failed to respond to various notices and accordingly, Ld. AO, on best judgment basis, added cash deposits in savings bank account for Rs.18.16 Lacs to the income of the assessee as concealed income. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for want of any response from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

The Ld. AR, Shri Tarsem Lal, sought admission of additional grounds as well as additional evidences in the form of various documents to vehemently assail the reassessment jurisdiction of Ld. AO as well as quantum additions on merits. The Ld. AR sought quashing of reassessment proceedings on the ground that the reopening was without due application of mind. The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, stated that the assessee has remained non-cooperative through-out.

3.

Finding substance in the argument of Ld. AR, we set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of legal grounds as well as quantum additions on merits with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case within three effective opportunities. Every endeavour shall be made for early disposal of the appeal since the appeal pertain to AY 2012-13.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (UDAYAN DAS GUPTA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद" /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 16-04-2025 आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. ""थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड"फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →