Case Law Details
Nitrangan Singh Gwal Vs ITO (ITAT Allahabad)
In Nitrangan Singh Gwal vs. ITO, the ITAT Allahabad dealt with an appeal involving a ₹45,42,005 cash deposit in an ICICI Bank account during the financial year 2010-11. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, issuing a notice under Section 148. The assessee failed to respond to multiple notices, leading to an ex parte assessment. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] also observed non-compliance during appellate proceedings.
Before the tribunal, the assessee submitted an affidavit claiming ignorance about the source of the deposits and alleged fraudulent activity in his bank account. The ITAT, acknowledging the lack of complete evidence and in consideration of the principles of natural justice, provided the assessee the benefit of the doubt. The matter was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee another opportunity to present his case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT ALLAHABAD
This is an appeal arising from an order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) passed by ld. CIT(A), NFAC (hereinafter the ld. ‘CIT(A) vide order dated 16.11.2023. It is seen that proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated on account of a cash deposit of Rs.4542005/- in a savings bank account maintained with ICICI Bank Limited, Mirzapur during F.Y. 2010-11. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act dated 26.03.2018 was issued. It is seen from the record that the proceedings before the ld. AO were conducted in an ex parte manner since the assessee, for reasons best known to him, did not comply with any of the notices issued by the ld. AO from time to time.
1.1 On the last date of hearing, the ld. DR filed an application for adjournment. This application for adjournment has been rejected since this matter was adjudicable on the basis of material on record.
2. Before the ld. CIT(A) also, the appellant did not make any compliance to the notices fixing the case for hearing. It is recorded in para 4.1, as to the number of efforts made by the office of ld. CIT(A) to fix the case for hearing and how there was no response from the side of the assessee. Before us, the appellant has filed a short paper book in which it is seen that there is an affidavit in which the assessee has pleaded ignorance about the source of the said deposit as under:-
2.1 Apart from this affidavit, the appellant has also filed letters written to the Branch Manager, ICICI Bank, Laxa Branch, Varanasi about alleged fraudulent activity in his bank account.
3. The ld. CIT DR vehemently argued that an assessee who has not complied to hearing notices before the authorities below should not be allowed any relief.
4. We have considered the orders of authorities below as also the documents contained in the paper book filed by the assessee and also the submissions of the ld. CIT DR. It is clear from a close reading of the documents that in the present state and considering the facts and circumstances, the assessee deserves a chance to prove the bona fides of his claim, of fraudulent activity in his bank account, before the ld. AO. Accordingly, giving the benefit of doubt to the appellant, we deem it fit to remand this matter back to the file of the ld. AO for fresh adjudication, after affording an opportunity of being heard. Needless to say, the appellant would do well to present the facts of his case and enable the ld. AO to assess his correct income.
5. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 02.12.2024 at Allahabad, U.P.
Author Bio
