Ashwin Goel vs ACIT

Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:

The captioned appeals are filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act', for short), pertaining to the Assessment Years (‘A.Y.s’ for short) 2017-18 & 2020-21 to 2023-24.

As the facts are identical in all these appeals, we pass a consolidated order taking ITA No.5387/Del/2026 as a lead case.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

The brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the share trading business. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration dated 10.01.2018 declaring the total income at Rs.13,54,640/- out of ‘income from house property’ and ‘from other sources’ and had claimed deduction under Chapter VIA amounting to Rs.1,54,346/- and the same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. The assessee’s case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act pursuant to the search and seizure operation carried out u/s 132 of the Act in the case of Shri Pankaj Goel, who had established an entity by the name M/s Asian Capital Bulls Pvt. Ltd., which was used for the purpose of providing accommodation entry by way of bogus long-term capital gain to various beneficiaries in which the assessee is alleged to have been one of the beneficiaries of such bogus transaction. Notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 22.07.2022 was duly issued and served upon the assessee in response to which the assessee had filed his return of income declaring the total income at Rs.13,54,640/-. The Ld. AO observed that the assessee had purchased 5725 equity shares of Yes Bank Limited through the broker M/s Asia Bulls Vs. Capital Pvt. Ltd., f or a consideration of Rs.2,41,023/- and the assessee had subsequently sold 5725 equity shares and had earned a capital gain of Rs.68,64,066/- which was claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. The Ld. AO had sought for various details such as the mode of purchase along with supporting documents, copy of demat account along with copy of contract note for purchase and sale, copy of bank statement during the period of purchase, source of fund for the said purchase, ITR, balance sheet and P&L Account along with various other details. The assessee had requested the Ld. AO for further time to furnish the same as these were 15-year old documents. The ld. AO rejected the assessee’s request and proceeded to pass the assessment order dated 22.05.2023 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act determining the total income at Rs.82,18,706/-, after making an addition of Rs.68,64,066/- towards the capital gain treating the same as bogus transaction. The Ld. AO also initiated penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority, who, vide an ex parte order dated 20.03.2026, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us challenging the order of the Ld.CIT(A).

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The ld. AR for the assessee contended that the notice issued by the Ld.CIT(A) was sent to a different e-mail id from that which was mentioned in the Form 35. The ld. AR brought our attention to the said fact and contended that there was violation of principles of natural justice. The Ld. AR prayed that the assessee be given one more opportunity to present his case before the first appellate authority stating that the assessee has got a good case on the merits.

The Ld. DR vehemently opposed the prayer of the assessee for the reason that the assessee has not properly complied before the Ld. AO as well. The ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

On the above facts of the case, we deem it fit to extend the assessee one more opportunity to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A) by adhering to the principles of natural justice and in the interest of justice dispensation. The assessee is directed to strictly comply with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) who is to adjudicate all the grounds raised by the assessee, both legal as well as on the merits, in accordance with the provisions of law. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are hereby allowed for statistical purposes

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose.

Since the facts are identical, our decision in ITA No.5387/Del2026 as above would apply mutatis mutandis to these appeals and these appeals are also allowed for statistical purposes.

To sum up, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.