This article provides an in-depth analysis of the case ITA 249/DEL/2019, where the appellant, Yatendra Kumar from Meerut, contested the assessment order issued by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward-2(4), Meerut, for the assessment year 2013-14. The primary issue was the assessment of unexplained deposits in the appellant’s bank account.
The appellant, Yatendra Kumar, filed an appeal against the order dated 12.06.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Meerut. The assessment year in question was 2013-14, and the appeal was filed on 14.01.2019.
The main contention in the appeal was related to the assessment of Rs. 20,43,800/- as unexplained deposits in the appellant’s bank account. The appellant argued that the assessment was arbitrary, unjust, and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case.
The case was heard on 01.10.2019 by the Delhi ‘SMC’ Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The bench comprised Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member. The appellant was represented by Sh. V.K. Goel, CA, while the respondent was represented by Ms. Ekta Vishnoi, Senior Departmental Representative (DR).
The appellant argued that the assessment order was passed without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and without adhering to the principles of natural justice. It was further submitted that the CIT(A) also erred in law and on facts by confirming the ex-parte reassessment order passed by the AO under sections 144/147 of the Income Tax Act.
The respondent, represented by the Senior DR, relied on the findings of the AO and the CIT(A), arguing that multiple opportunities were given to the appellant, who remained non-cooperative throughout the proceedings.
The tribunal observed that the AO had passed the ex-parte reassessment order dated 09.10.2017 under sections 147/144 of the Income Tax Act, which was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice.
The tribunal noted that while the appellant had remained non-cooperative before both the AO and the CIT(A), the AO’s approach in passing an ex-parte order without adequate hearing was erroneous. The tribunal emphasized the importance of providing the appellant with a fair opportunity to present his case and substantiate his claims with appropriate evidence.
In the final judgment, the tribunal set aside the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing that the matter be heard on 13.01.2020 at 10.00 AM. The tribunal instructed the CIT(A) to decide the issues afresh after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. The tribunal made it clear that no further notice for hearing would be issued, and the appellant was directed to appear on the specified date and time.
This case highlights the necessity of adhering to the principles of natural justice and ensuring that appellants are given a fair opportunity to present their case. The tribunal’s decision to set aside the issues for fresh adjudication underscores the importance of procedural fairness in tax assessments.
The order was pronounced in the open court on 01st October 2019 by Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member.
Case Number: ITA 249/DEL/2019
Appellant: Yatendra Kumar, Meerut
Respondent: ITO, Ward-2(4), Meerut
Assessment Year: 2013-14
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2019-10-01
Date of Pronouncement: 2019-10-01
This case exemplifies the complexities involved in adjudicating unexplained deposits in bank accounts and the need for detailed evidence and adherence to natural justice principles to reach a fair conclusion.
Yatendra Kumar’s Appeal in ITA 249/DEL/2019: Unexplained Deposits in Bank Account
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