Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH C, DELHI
Before: SH. SUDHIR KUMAR & SH. MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH "C", DELHI
BEFORE SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.6173/DEL/2024
Assessment Year: 2019-20
DCIT Central Circle Hapur, Chungi Ghaziabad | Vs. | Imran S/o Sh. Haji Rahman Ilahi ward No 10, Peer Khan Mohall Bulandshar PAN NO. AGNPI1732D (APPELLANT) | (RESPONDENT)
Appellant by | None Respondent by | Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR )
Date of hearing: | 27/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement: | 27/08/2025
ORDER
PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 New Noida [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)"] vide order dated 18.10.2024 pertaining to A.Y. 2019-20 arising out the assessment order dated 30-09-2021 u/s.144/153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short 'the Act').
The brief facts of the case are that information was received by the investigating Wing, Ghaziabad from SHO Hafizpur Hapur regarding the interception of cash amounting to Rs. 7.39,100/- along with various incriminating documents in a Hyundai Santro Car bearing vehicle number DL-2CAE-3232. The alleged cash was seized from the possession of Sh. Imran. The search warrant was issued in the name of Sh. Imran and Sh. Shezad Quershi. The case of the assessee was centralized and after recording the satisfaction note, the notice under section 153C of the Act was issued on 04-02-2021for filing the return of income. In the response the assessee did not filed the return of income. The assessee had filed the return of income declaring total income at Rs. 10,08,290/- on 31-10- 2019 u/s 139of the Act. Notices were issued to the assessee with questionnaire but no reply was filed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment after making the addition s of Rs. 19,92,910/- of one percent commission of the credit / deposits in the current account and Rs. 19,92,91,042/- u/s 68 r.w.s 115 BBE of the Act.
- 3. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) vide his order dated 18-10-2024 set-aside the assessment order with direction to AO to make a fresh assessment as per provisions of law. Being aggrieved the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the revenue is in appeal before the tribunal. - 4. Learned authorized representative for Department of Revenue submitted that the, Ld. Assessing completed the assessment ex-parte because the assessee did not furnished any submission before the AO. Ld. CIT(A) should have confirmed the order of the AO. None is present for the assessee. - 5. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that despite opportunities granted by the AO, the assessee did not appear before the authority, for which the AO completed the assessment. The Ld. CIT(A) by impugned order set-aside the assessment order for fresh assessment and directed the
ITA No. 6173/Del/2024 DCIT vs Imran
AO to make the fresh assessment as per provisions of law. The ld. CIT(A) has passed the order as per the provision of the section 251 (1)(a) of the Act as amended with effect from 01-10-2024. We do not find any reasons to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). The appeal of the revenue has no force and liable to be dismissed
In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27.08.2025.
SD/- Sd/-
(MANISH AGARWAL) ( SUDHIR KUMAR)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (JUDICIAL MEMBER)
Neha, Sr. PS
Date: 15.09.2025 Copy forwarded to:
- 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT - 4. CIT(Appeals) ` - 5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI