KRISHNA DEVI SEHRAWAT,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-43(6), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3359/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 October 2025AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A) (NFAC) which had set aside the assessment order and referred the matter back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh assessment. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not provided any documentary evidence or explanation during the assessment proceedings before the AO. However, the assessee submitted an explanation and supporting documents during the appellate proceedings before the NFAC, which were not available to the AO. The Tribunal found that the NFAC had rightly exercised its powers under section 251(1)(a) of the Act in setting aside the assessment order due to the availability of new evidence during the appeal. The NFAC directed the assessee to furnish necessary submissions and evidence to the AO within the time given by the AO for fresh assessment. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the NFAC's order and therefore upheld it. The issue of whether the addition under section 69A was justified was not decided on merits by the NFAC, and consequently, by the ITAT, as the matter was remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Krishna Devi Seharwat, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The NFAC's order dated 26-02-2025 pertained to Assessment Year 2017-18 and arose from an assessment order dated 27-05-2023 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO had made an addition of Rs. 52,50,000/- under section 69A. The assessee had initially declared a total income of Rs. 7,40,320/-. The procedural history involved notices under section 148A(b), 148, 143(2), 142(1), and show cause notices for proceedings under section 144. The NFAC, in its order, set aside the matter to the AO for fresh assessment.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under section 148 is bad in law, illegal, without jurisdiction, and barred by limitation, rendering the assessment order liable to be quashed, and if the CIT(A) erred in not holding so. 2. Whether the reassessment proceedings initiated are contrary to the provisions of law, including sections 147 to 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and if the assessment order passed is liable to be quashed, and if the CIT(A) erred in not holding so. 3. Whether the assessment order passed by the AO is bad in law, without jurisdiction, and barred by limitation, and if the CIT(A) erred in not holding so. 4. Whether the CIT(A) and AO erred in making an addition of Rs. 52,50,000/- on account of alleged unaccounted money under section 69A of the Act, and if the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted. 5. Whether the CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the appeal on merits and setting aside the case to the file of the AO under section 251(1)(a) of the Act. Assessee's contentions (as per grounds of appeal): The notice under section 148 is bad in law, illegal, without jurisdiction, and barred by limitation. Reassessment proceedings are contrary to law. The assessment order is bad in law, without jurisdiction, and barred by limitation. The addition of Rs. 52,50,000/- under section 69A is erroneous and liable for deletion. The CIT(A) erred in not deciding the appeal on merits and instead remanding the case. Revenue's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 251(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E”, DELHI

Before: SH. SUDHIR KUMAR

Hearing: 22/09/2025Pronounced: 22/09/2025

Date of hearing: 22/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 22/09/2025 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. NFAC)”] vide order dated 26-02-2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 arising out the assessment order dated 27-5-2023 u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

The assessee has raised the following ground in appeal :- i) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the notice u/s 148 issued in this case is bad in law, illegal, without jurisdiction and barred by limitation and, therefore, the said notice u/s. 148 alongwith assessment order passed on the foundation of such notice are liable to be quashed and CIT(A) erred in not holding so. ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the reassessment proceedings initiated are contrary to the provisions of law including the specific provisions of section 147 to section 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and therefore, the reassessment proceeding initiated alognwith the assessment order passed are liable to be quashed and CIT(A) erred in not holding so. iii) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order passed by the AO is bad in law, without jurisdiction and barred by limitation and CIT(A) erred in not holding so. iv) On the facts and circumstances of the ace and in law, the CIT(A), AO erred in making addition of Rs. 52,50,000/- on the account of alleged unaccounted money u/s. 69A of the Act, and, therefore, the addition made by the AO is liable to be deleted. v) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the appeal on merits and setting aside the case to the file of the AO in terms 251(1)(a) of the Act.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income for the instant assessment year declaring Rs. 7,40,320/- as total income, computed as per provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Show cause notice u/s. 148A(b) was issued on 23.5.2022 and accordingly order passed on 23.5.2022. Notice u/s. 148 was issued on 30.7.2022 and applicant filed reply on 25.8.2022. Thereafter notice u./s. 143(2) was issued on 23.1.2023 and further notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 17.2.2023 and on 19.4.2023, show cause notice for proceedings u/s. 144 was issued on 19.4.2023 . In response, assessee replied. Again show cause notice u/s. 144 of the Act was issued on 11.5.2023 and its reply was submitted by the Assessee on 16.5.2023. Thereafter, AO passed the order u/s. 147/144B by making addition u/s. 69A of Rs. 52,50,000/-.

4.

Aggrieved the order of the AO the assessee preferred the appeal before the Ld. NFAC who vide its order dated 26-02-2025 has set aside the matter to the file of the AO for fresh assessment.

5.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has set aside the appeal to the file of the AO for fresh assessment by holding as under:- “5. I have gone through the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, assessment order and the submissions of the appellant. The AO, after providing reasonable opportunity treated the unsecured loan to the tune of Rs. 52,50,000/- as deemed income of the assessee for the FY 2016-17 relevant to the AY 2017-18 and completed the assessment proceedings. The assessee did not provide any documentary evidence or explanation during the assessment proceedings. However, the appellant has now submitted an explanation and supporting documents during the appellate proceedings, which were not available to the AO earlier. 5.1 Looking to the facts of the case, the interests of natural justice, and in exercise of the powers conferred upon the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under section 251(1)(a) of the Act, the impugned assessment order u/s. 144 is hereby set aside and referred back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment in accordance with law. The appellant is directed to furnish necessary submissions and evidences in support of his appeal and such other information required by the Assessing Officer, strictly within the time given by the Assessing Officer.”

6. After perusing the aforesaid finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we find has rightly given the finding that since the assessee did not provide any documentary evidence or explanation during the assessment proceedings and the assessee has submitted an explanation and supporting documents during the appellate proceedings only, which were not available to the AO earlier. Therefore, the assessment order u/s. 144 was rightly set aside and referred back to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment in accordance with law alongwith the directions to the assessee to furnish necessary submissions and evidences in support of his/her appeal and such other information required by the

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →