Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 07 ITAT CK 2115

Deepak vs Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 8 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member · Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member
CASE NUMBER
ITA No.831/Del/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 371 words

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 10.12.2025 of Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083502569(1) arising out of the assessment order dated 30.01.2024 u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, for AY: 2015-16

2.

On hearing both sides we find that among other grounds of merits assesse has raised jurisdictional ground of assumption of jurisdiction u/s 147 r.w.s. 148A of the Act and that the reopening was barred by limitation, hence, invalid. We find from the submissions and the material before us that the additions have been made by the assessing officer on account of cash deposits of Rs.58,44,000/- in the bank account of the assesse and assessing officer has observed that assesse had failed to give any explanation and documentary evidences of the source of deposit and the same has been sustained by the NFAC by the impugned order and we find that NFAC mentions of a show cause notice being issued to the assesse and assesse had filed written submissions on 08.10.2025.

3.

Before us ld. Counsel has demonstrated on the basis of submissions that relevant documentary evidences including confirmations from the donor father were filed to establish the gift received from father and the receipt of money from identified individuals. However, both the ld. Assessing Officer and NFAC, have very summarily reached conclusions without any observations on the merits of the submissions and documentary evidences of the assesse by giving an incorrect finding that assesse had failed to file submissions and documentary evidences.

4.

In the light of aforesaid discussion, though ld. DR had defended impugned orders, we find that the same cannot be sustained in law and accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders and allow the appeal for statistical purposes. The issue on merits as well as law are restored to the files of ld. Assessing Officer to give fresh opportunity of hearing to the assesse and after taking into consideration the submissions and documentary evidences of assesse, pass an order afresh.