Nityanand Pandey Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Kolkata Bench, set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] in the case of Nityanand Pandey vs. ITO and restored the entire matter, including an addition of {Rs. 1,86,25,000} for unexplained cash deposits, back to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for de novo consideration.
The Tribunal’s primary rationale was that the CIT(A) had failed to pass a reasoned order on the merits of the case, instead merely upholding the AO’s view and dismissing the appeal due to the assessee’s non-compliance. The ITAT held that this non-speaking order violated the statutory requirement under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Background and Lower Authorities’ Actions
The case relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2013-14. The assessee had failed to file a return of income, leading the AO to issue a notice under Section 148 based on information regarding a cash deposit of {Rs. 1,86,25,000} in the assessee’s bank account.
The assessee failed to comply with multiple notices issued by the AO during the reassessment proceedings. Consequently, the AO completed the assessment ex parte under Section 144/147, treating the entire {Rs. 1,86,25,000} as unexplained income.
