SURYA PRATAP SINGH CHAUHAN,LUCKNOW vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), LUCKNOW
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 642/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow13 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2018-19 Surya Pratap Singh Chauhan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 68/422, Gandhi Nagar, Lucknow- 2(1), Lucknow-New 226001 Pan: Awgpc6261P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Adv Revenue By: Smt. Sonal Singh, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.02.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Dated 7.07.2025 Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeals Of The Assessee That Were Filed Against The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessment Unit For The A.Y. 2018-19 Under Section 147 R.W.S. 144 On 3.03.2023. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. Because The Notice Issued Under Section 148 Has Been Issued By The Jao, Which Is Contrary To The Provisions Of Section 151A Of The Act, The Entire Assessment Framed Is Bad In Law Be Quashed. 02. Because The Notice Under Section 148 Having Been Issued On 23.03.2022, Beyond The Period Of Three Years & The Total Investment In Bit Coin Trading Is Of Rs.9,63,000/-, There Being No Profit On The Same On The Contrary Being Loss, The Entire Reopening Of The Assessment Is Without Proper Verification Of Facts, Based On Wrong Facts The Addition Of Rs.88,55,128/- Made By The Ao & Upheld By The Cit(A) Be Deleted. 03. Because The Cit(A), Nfac, Has Failed To Appreciate The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & Has Arbitrarily Upheld The Addition Of Rs.88,55,128/- Under Section 69 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 Being Unexplained Investment In Purchase & Sale Of Bitcoins, Which Addition Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law, The Addition Made Be Deleted.
For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sonal Singh, JCIT DR
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 69
…e ld. AR prayed that these are purely legal grounds and he sought admission of the same in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Limited vs. CIT 229 ITR 383, the Hon’ble Guahati High Court in the case of Assam Co. India Limited 256 ITR 423 and All Cargo Global Logistics vs. DCIT 30 SOT 374 (Mumbai). 3. The facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer received information from the insight Portal that the assessee had undertaken/was involved in huge bitcoin trading in the F.Y. 2017-18 amounting to Rs. 83,78,124/-. Accordingly, after giving due opportunity of being heard under sec…
