ALKA SINGHAI,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the lower authorities overlooked the assessee's e-filed return and reply. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication after considering the assessee's submissions and providing an opportunity for a hearing.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 based on information about bank deposits. The assessee did not file a return in response to notices, leading the AO to assess the entire bank deposit amount as income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-payment of tax.
What were the issues?
Whether the lower authorities erred by not considering the assessee's e-filed return and reply during reassessment proceedings. Whether the CIT(A) wrongly dismissed the appeal for non-payment of tax without considering the merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 249(4)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI
आदेश / O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 12.02.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 23.03.2022 passed by learned NFAC, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2013-14, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
The background facts leading to this appeal are such that the AO, on the basis of information about deposits in assessee’s bank a/c during the financial year 2012-13 relevant to AY 2013-14 under consideration, formed
Page 1 of 3 a belief of escapement of income and issued notice dated 31.03.2021 u/s 148 to undertake proceeding of section 147 against assessee. In response to such notice, the assessee did not file any return. The AO also issued notices u/s 142(1) which again remained uncompiled with as per noting in Para 3 of assessment-order. Ultimately, the AO passed assessment-order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Act to the best of his judgement assessing the entire amount of bank deposits of Rs. 3,30,79,300/- as total income. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal. The CIT(A) treated assessee’s first-appeal as deficient on the footing of non-payment of tax as required by section 249(4)(b) and accordingly dismissed assessee’s appeal as non-admitted. Now, the assessee has come before us challenging the orders of lower-authorities.
On perusal of orders of lower-authorities, we find that both of the lower authorities have noted that the assessee has not filed any return to department u/s 139 or even in response to notice u/s 148 (Para 2 & 3 of assessment-order and Para 2.1 & 2.2 of impugned order of first-appeal). However, in Paper-Book, the assessee has filed a copy of Acknowledgement No. 397861730210322 of Return of income e-filed by assessee on 21.03.2022 declaring a total income of Rs. 1,19,910/- before passing of assessment-order by AO on 23.03.2022. The AO has passed assessment- order adopting “Nil” figure of returned income without taking cognizance of income declared by assessee in return and thereby assessing total income at Rs. 3,30,79,300/- only after making addition of equal amount. Thus, the orders passed by lower-authorities are contrary to record. Further, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee AO has wrongly treated the entire amounts of bank deposits of Rs. 3,30,79,300/- as income of assessee without considering assessee’s reply dated 22.03.2022 e-filed to AO during assessment proceeding vide Acknowledgement No. 399611391220322, copy at Page No. 1-5 of Paper-Book. Therefore, this matter should be restored to the file of AO for examination of assessee’s details/documents and fresh
Page 2 of 3 adjudication. Ld. DR does not have any objection against remanding to AO. Faced with this situation, we remand this matter to the file of AO for a proper adjudication on merit after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, uninfluenced by his earlier order in any manner. 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.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
