KUNWAR PRANAV SINGH CHAMPION,ROORKEE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ROORKEE
Facts
The assessee appealed against an addition of INR 43.00 Lakhs made under Section 68 for unexplained cash credit, which was sustained by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's failure to provide details of declared agricultural income. The assessee also appealed against a penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) related to this addition.
Held
The Tribunal restored the matter of the unexplained cash credit to the Assessing Officer for re-examination of the agricultural income, directing the assessee to provide necessary evidence. Consequently, the penalty levied under Section 271AAC(1) was deleted, with liberty for the AO to initiate new penalty proceedings if required after the remand.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the validity of the addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credit due to insufficient evidence of agricultural income and the consequential levy of penalty under Section 271AAC(1).
Sections Cited
Section 68, Section 143(3), Section 144B, Section 250, Section 271AAC(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN “DB” BENCH: DEHRADUN
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN “DB” BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 40 & 41/DDN/2026 [Assessment Year : 2020-21] Kunwar Pranav Singh vs Union of India/ Champion, 14-1, CIT(A)/ ITO, Dalanwala Mohini Road, Roorkee Dehradun-248001 Uttarakhand Uttarakhand PAN-CPUPS4487J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by None Respondent by Shri Amal Pal Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 11.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 12.03.2026
ORDER PER BENCH The captioned appeals are filed by assessee against the orders, both dated 24.11.2025 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] against the assessment order dated 22.08.2022 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act and against the penalty order dated 21.03.2023 passed u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2020-21.
At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, both appeals of the assessee are taken for
ITA No. 40 & 41/DDN/2026
hearing in the absence of the Ld.AR and on the basis of material available on record.
Heard the contention of Ld.Sr.DR and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(A), it is observed that the addition of INR 43.00 Lakhs was made u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credit which was sustained for the reason that assessee has failed to file the details with respect to the agricultural income declared by him. Even before AO, no such details were filed by the assessee. Thus, considering these facts and in the interest of justice, the matter is restored to the file of AO with the direction to examine the agricultural income declared by the assessee. The assessee is directed to file all the necessary evidences in support of the agricultural income declared. With these directions, all grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.40/DDN/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes.
Since we have restored the assessee’s appeal filed against the order passed u/s 143(3), therefore, the levy of penalty for the addition in such order has no legs to stand therefore, the same is hereby deleted. AO is at liberty to initiate the penalty proceedings in case if so required, on the addition made in the remand proceedings. All the grounds taken by assessee in ITA No.41/DDN/2026 are thus, allowed.
ITA No. 40 & 41/DDN/2026
In the result, the captioned appeals of the assessee in ITA No. 40/DDN/2026 [AY 2020-21] is allowed for statistical purposes and ITA No. 41/DDN/2026 [AY 2020-21] is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 12.03.2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) (MANISH AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date- 12.03.2026 *Amit Kumar, Sr.P.S*
