This case analysis covers the appeal ITA 1174/DEL/2020 filed by ITO Ward-1(5), Noida, against Jayant Budhiraja, Noida, for the assessment year 2009-10. The case was filed on June 16, 2020, and the final tribunal order was pronounced on November 10, 2022, by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘H’.
Jayant Budhiraja filed his return of income for the AY 2009-10. The case was picked up for scrutiny assessment under sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment was completed by the AO on November 29, 2016, determining an income of Rs. 1,16,55,000/- and creating a demand of Rs. 1,08,39,219/-. The primary issue was the addition of Rs. 11,65,000/- for unexplained cash deposits in his bank account.
The Revenue challenged the jurisdiction of the CIT(A)-1, Noida, arguing that the appeal should have been filed with and decided by the jurisdictional CIT(A), Ghaziabad. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue’s own CIT(A)’s jurisdiction was questioned, which could not be brushed aside lightly. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the impugned order back to the file of the CIT(A) having proper jurisdiction over the assessee.
The AO made an addition of Rs. 11,65,000/- as unexplained cash deposits in Jayant Budhiraja’s bank account. Despite multiple notices issued under sections 148 and 142(1), the assessee did not comply. Consequently, the assessment was completed under sections 144 and 147.
The assessee appealed against the AO’s order, but the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. The Revenue then filed cross-objections before the Tribunal, questioning the jurisdiction of the CIT(A) and the validity of the order passed after the CIT(A)’s retirement.
The Tribunal’s order in ITA 1174/DEL/2020 was in favor of the Revenue on jurisdictional grounds. The Tribunal restored the case back to the file of the CIT(A) having proper jurisdiction over the assessee, ensuring that the appeal is decided afresh with a reasonable opportunity for both parties to be heard.
This ruling emphasizes the importance of proper jurisdiction in the adjudication of appeals. It underscores the necessity for the assessing officers and appellate authorities to adhere to jurisdictional boundaries to ensure fair and legal proceedings. Additionally, it reaffirms the taxpayers’ right to have their appeals heard by the correct legal authority under the Income Tax Act.
The consolidated order covered 34 appeals and cross-objections filed by the Revenue against various assessees, including Jayant Budhiraja. The Tribunal clubbed all appeals and cross-objections together for brevity and convenience, disposing of them by a consolidated order. The primary issues raised were jurisdictional defects and the validity of orders passed by CIT(A)-1, Noida, after his retirement.
The Tribunal allowed the appeals and cross-objections filed by the Revenue for statistical purposes, directing that the cases be restored to the file of the CIT(A) with proper jurisdiction for fresh adjudication.
For detailed information, the complete text of the Tribunal’s order can be accessed in the case ITA 1174/DEL/2020, pronounced on November 10, 2022.
Case Analysis of ITA 1174/DEL/2020: ITO Ward-1(5), Noida vs. Jayant Budhiraja, Noida
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform