RAMENDRA SINGH,KANNAUJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(2)(3), KANNAUJ
In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 53/ALLD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Ramendra Singh V. The Income Tax Officer Bahadurpur Ward 4(2)(3) Majhigawan Kannauj Kannauj (U.P) Tan/Pan:Gzqps7971P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shvetank Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 26.07.2023, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Had Not Filed The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. The Income Tax Department Was In Possession Of Information That Huge Amounts Have Been Credited To The Assessee’S Bank Account No.001311002103008 Maintained With Farrukhabad District Central Co-Operative Bank, Saurikh, Kannauj By Way Of Cash & Credit Entries. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Issued Notice Under Section 142(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’), Requiring The Assessee To Furnish The Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration. However, The Said Notice Was
For Appellant: Shri Shvetank Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 115BSection 142Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69ASection 80T
72,910/-
Thus there was no other Income which from mandatory taxability creating for filing ITR.
3. Section 144/142(1) (ex-Parte assessment order pass out)
ITA No.53/ALLD/2025 Page 4 of 7
That the service of time notice u/s 142 (1) the assesses was not present at home addressee and Postman person note, that not agree to received
