KAMLESH KOUSHAL,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 1(2), INDORE

ITA 708/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 March 2026AY 2017-1818 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 79 days in filing the appeal, finding the reasons to be bonafide. On the substantive issues, the Tribunal observed that the impugned assessment order was passed under section 144 of the Act. The assessee's counsel submitted that the ROI, replies, and other submissions made before the AO, as placed in the paper book, should be considered afresh. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. DR for the revenue agreed that these materials could be considered afresh in de novo proceedings. In light of these facts and circumstances, the Tribunal deemed it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the file of the AO on a de novo basis. The AO was directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing and considering all relevant information, material, and documents in a time-bound manner. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Kamlesh Koushal, is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 5,62,071/- under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, treating cash deposits and other credit entries in the assessee's bank accounts as unexplained money. The assessee had filed a Return of Income (ROI) showing Rs. 0/- income, but the AO proceeded under section 144 due to non-compliance with notices. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's first appeal, holding that additional evidence submitted by the assessee was not admissible under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, and that the additions were based on material gathered by the AO. The assessee is now before the ITAT challenging the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in rejecting the additional evidence filed by the assessee, which goes to the root of the addition made, and ought to have admitted it in the interest of justice as per Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962? 2. Whether the impugned assessment order passed under section 144 of the Act is bad in law, illegal, and in violation of the principles of natural justice? Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the CIT(A) erred in rejecting the additional evidence, which should have been admitted under Rule 46A to consider the merits of the addition. The assessee also contended that the assessment order under section 144 was bad in law and violated natural justice. The assessee submitted that a ROI was filed on 22.11.2019 in response to a notice under section 142(1), and a reply was also filed on 21.08.2019. The assessee prayed for the matter to be remanded to the AO for a de novo consideration of all submissions and evidence. Revenue's contentions: The revenue, through the Senior Departmental Representative (Sr. DR), left the issue of delay in filing the appeal to the wisdom of the Tribunal. Regarding the merits, the Sr. DR also left the issue of considering the material afresh to the Tribunal's discretion.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253,Section 250,Section 144,Section 69A,Section 272A(1)(d),Section 274,Section 115BBE,Section 246A,Section 133(6),Section 142(1),Section 139

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRIPARESH M JOSHI

For Appellant: Shri Madhav Khandelwal, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.02.2026Pronounced: 06.03.2026

Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:

This is an Appeal filed by the Assessee under section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this Tribunal as & by way of second appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:- ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1075202299(1) dated 28.03.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after

referred to as the “Impugned order”. The relevant assessment

Kamlesh Koushal ITA No. 708/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2017-18

year is 2017-18 and the corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017. 2. Factual Matrix

2.

1 That as and by way of an “ Assessment order” made u/s 144 of the A

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →