MURLIDHAR LOHIA,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANPUR
The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed
ITA 418/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow21 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2018-19 Murlidhar Lohia V. The Income Tax Officer 106, Anand Palace Ward 1(3)(1) Allengaj, Kanpur (U.P) Kanpur Tan/Pan:Akbpl3586F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.04.2025, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed His Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 16.08.2018, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.5,42,050/-. The Case Of The Assessee Was Reopened Under Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’) After Issuing Notice Under Section 148 Of The Act, On The Basis Of The Information That The Assessee Had Received Cash Credit Of Rs.14,21,000/- During The Year Under Consideration. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Issued Statutory Notices To The Assessee, Requiring The Assessee To Furnish Details Of The Aforesaid Cash Credit With Documentary
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, D.R
Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A
153 taxmann.com 70
(Bombay), submitted that since the mandatory requirement of giving minimum seven days of time to the assessee to furnish reply to the notice under section 148A(b) of the Act, was not fulfilled, the impugned notice under section 148A(b) of the Act dated 17.03.2022 and further order under section 148A(d) of the Act dated