AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM :
The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 21.02.2025 of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT(A), Meerut/10748/2019-20 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order dated 02/23.12.2019 passed u/s 144/147 of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13.
Brief facts of the case are that the AO has information that the assessee has made cash deposit of INR 42,52,100/- in her saving bank account during the year under appeal. Notice u/s 133(6) dated 15.02.2019 was issued to explain the source however, as the assessee was failed to make any compliance, the proceedings were initiated for re-opening of the assessment and notice u/s 148 was issued on 29.03.2019. Thereafter, the assessee has neither filed any return of income nor filed any submissions therefore, the re-assessment order was passed u/s 144/147 of the Act dated 02/23.12.2019 by making addition of INR 42,52,100/- as against the income declared at INR 3,21,110/- in return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act and total income of the assessee was assessed at INR 45,73,210/- through the order passed u/s 144/147 of the Act.
Against the said order, assessee filed appeal before Ld.CIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 21.02.2025, dismissed the appeal of the assessee wherein various opportunities were given however, on most of the occasions, assessee sought adjournments or partly filed the replies wherein it is contended that the cash deposits was out of sale of flats and therefore, at the most, 8% of the same be treated as income of the assessee. However, Ld.CIT(A) has not accepted the same in the absence of any such details and confirmed the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
Ground of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are with respect to the initiation of the proceedings u/s 148 of the Act wherein assessee has challenged the service of notice issued u/s 148 of the Act.
Before us, Ld.AR for the assessee submits that notice u/s 148 was served on incorrect address though the AO has the knowledge about the correct address of the assessee. It is further submitted by Ld.AR that the AO has taken KYC details from the bank regarding deposits wherein correct address of the assessee was available. It is thus, submits that once the notice u/s 148 was not served upon the assessee, consequent order passed be hold as bad in law.
On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submits that notice was issued on the address provided at ITBA portal and served upon the assessee. Ld. DR submits that in compliance to notice issued one Shri Ayush Singhal, C.A./Shri Abhishek Goel, C.A. appeared on the behalf of the assessee which is also observed in the assessment order. It is submitted by Ld. Sr. DR that once the assessee has authorized some person to appear on her behalf, it could not be said that notice u/s 148 was not served upon the assessee. Ld. DR filed a report of the AO on this issue which reads as under:-
2.1.“So far as the legality of notice issued u/s 148 of the LT. Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as "Act") is concerned whereby the assessee has stated that procedure as per law has not been followed it is submitted that in the case of Vimla Devi (PAN: AHKPV56720) the assessee had filed her ITR for the A.Y. 2012-13: on 21.05.2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 3,21,110/-, Later on, AIR Information was received that cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 42,52,100/- had been made in her savings bank account maintained with Andhra Bank, Branch: Jagriti Vihar, Garh Road, Meerut during the F.Y. 2011-12. Information was called for from the assessee u/s 133(6) of the Act vide this office letter dated 15.02.2019 to furnish explanation regarding the nature and source of cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 42,52,100/-made in her savings bank account during the F.Y. 2011-12. The date fixed for compliance was 25.02.2019 but on the said date no compliance was made by the assessee. Therefore, as per the provisions of section 148(2) of the Act which stood immediately before the commencement of Finance Act, 2021 reasons were recorded in writing by the then Assessing Officer and on the basis of the reasons recorded by the then Assessing Officer approval under section 151 of the Act was accorded by the then Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Meerut (erstwhile) to issue notice under section 148 of the Act in the case of the assessee Vimla Devi for the A.Y. 2012-13 with the following comments:-
"Yes, I am satisfied with the reasons recorded by the AO as at 'A' that it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961."
Henceforth, assessment proceedings were initiated in the case of the assessee for the A.Υ. 2012-13 vide issuance of notice u/s 148 dated 29.03.2019. Accordingly, the contention of the assessee that the notice u/s 148 of the Act had been issued without following the procedure as per law is not tenable and is also unjustifiable.
The abovementioned notice u/s 148 of the Act issued on 29.03.2019 was duly served upon the assessee on her address "Main Road, 387, Gali No. 2, Shergari, Meerut". In compliance to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2019 Shri Ayush Singhal C.A. /Abhishek Goel C.A., Authorized Counsel of the assessee filed power of attorney which is placed on scrutiny assessment folder. As per power of attorney the AR have been authorized by Vimla Devi on 18.06.2019 which in itself substantiates the fact that notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2019 was duly served upon the assessee. It is pertinent here to mention that before the first appellate authority Ld. CIT(A), NFAC the assessee had raised the contention the notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2019 was served at her old address without considering the new address given in the latest ROI.
The assessee ought to have specifically brought these facts to the notice of the Assessing Officer and sought complete change of her address reflecting in the PAN database so as to modify the same. Merely mentioning the new address in the latest ROI, the old address as available in PAN database cannot be assumed as incorrect or not existing as the assessee failed to communicate the same in specific terms to delete the old address and update with new address as per the due procedure of PAN database. Considering these facts, apparently the then Assessing Officer had issued and served the notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2019 as per the address available in the PAN database against the assessee and thereby there exists no infirmity in issue and service of notice by AO to assessee. Accordingly, the analogy advanced by the assessee in her GOA that the notice u/s 148 of the Act had not been served is not acceptable.”
Heard the contentions of both the parties at length and perused the material available on record. From the report of the AO, it is observed that the assessee has made compliance by appointing her Authorized Representative to appear on behalf of her before the AO. This can only be done when the assessee has received the notice u/s 148 of the Act thus, it cannot be said that no notice u/s 148 of the Act was served upon the assessee. In view of these facts, we find no merits in the Ground of appeal Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee hence, both Grounds of appeal Nos. 1 & 2 are dismissed.
Ground of appeal No.3 raised by the assessee are with respect to the addition of INR 45,73,210/- made towards cash deposit in her bank account.
Heard the contentions of both the parties at length and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the assessee has not made any compliance before the AO and filed certain details before Ld.CIT(A) however, Ld.CIT(A) has not sought any Remand Report from the AO on the document so filed and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. It appears that the assessee was provided reasonable opportunity of hearing, therefore, in the larger interest of justice, this issue is remanded to the file of AO with the directions to pass the assessment order denovo afresh after considering the submissions made by the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file all the requisite details before the AO as and when called for.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.