TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1450
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC) [03-10-2024] as the same was issued beyond the 'surviving period' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") read with TOLA and hence, the reassessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act is bad in law, barred by limitation, unsustainable and liable to be set aside and quashed. GROUND NO. II 2. That the re-opening notice issued u/s.148 has been issued without obtaining necessary approval u/s.151 of the Act from the specified authority as envisaged in the provisions of the section 151(ii) of the Act and hence the same is highly illegal, bad in law, void ab initio and unsustainable hence, it is earnestly requested that the re-opening notice and corresponding assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B may please be quashed and cancelled in limine. GROUND NO. III 3. a. That the Order passed u/s.148A(d) and the corresponding reopening notice issued u/s.148 on 27th July, 2022 has been issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(1), Raipur ('the Ld. JAO') and not by the Faceless Assessing Officer ("the Ld. FAO) t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the return of income filed, hence, it is earnestly prayed that the unjustified addition of Rs. 1,13,02,086/- may kindly be deleted. GROUND NO. VI 6. That the Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of the appeal. ITA No. 501/RPR/2024 (AY 2014-15) Ground No. I 1. That the re-opening notice dated 27.07.2022 issued u/s. 148 under the amended provisions of law is barred by limitation, unsustainable, invalid, void ab initio and untenable in view of the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Union of India vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 167 taxmann.com 70 (SC) [03-10-2024] as the same was issued beyond the 'surviving period' under the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") read with TOLA and hence, the reassessment order passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act is bad in law, barred by limitation, unsustainable and liable to be set aside and quashed. GROUND NO. II 2. That the re-opening notice issued u/s.148 has been issued without obtaining necessary approval u/s.151 of the Act from the specified authority as envisaged in the provisions of the section 151(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....section 69A of the Act treating the same as unexplained money which is highly unjustified, unwarranted, unsustainable, not proper on facts, ignoring the submissions of the appellant thereby based on presumptions & surmises and not in accordance with the provisions of law. Further, CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the deposits does not belong to the appellant and that he is only earning commission income on such amount which is duly disclosed in the return of income filed, hence, it is earnestly prayed that the unjustified addition of Rs. 2,89,18,520/- may kindly be deleted. GROUND NO. VI 6. That the Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of the appeal. 3. Since the aforesaid two appeals pertains to the same assessee having identical, interconnected and common controversies involved therein, therefore, these two appeals are heard together and taken up for adjudication under this common order. Accordingly, ITA 500/RPR/2024 is picked up as the lead case, wherein our decision and observations shall apply mutatis mutandis to the other appeal in ITA No. 501/RPR/2024. 4. The brief facts o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lier in the original return u/s 139 filed on 23.12.2013 for Rs. 1,93,220/-. Further, assessee furnished copy of bank statements, after deliberations, Ld. AO observed that there are certain variations in the information received from Investigation Wing and copy of statement furnished by the assessee, in response, there was no compliance by the assessee, therefore, the Ld. AO, concluded that, the assessee has failed to substantiate the source of the amount which had been credited in the bank account of his so-called proprietorship business entity, therefore, an amount of Rs. 1,13,02,086/- was proposed to be treated as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act, and to be added to the income of the assessee. Consequently, the assessee was asked to furnish details of utilization of cash withdrawal from the subject bank account. In absence of non-compliance by the assessee to the show cause notice issued dated 17.05.2023, he proposed addition u/s 69A was made to the written income of the assessee. 7. Aggrieved with the aforesaid addition, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the assessee remain noncompliant during the appellate proceedings towards all the notices is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uld mean effectively prosecuting an appeal". Purposefully and constructively interpreted, preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it and if a party retreats before the contest begins, it is as good as not having entered the fray. 5.4 It is pertinent to add here that laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well-known maxim "Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt". It means equity comes to the aid of the vigilant and not the slumbering. In all actions, suits and other proceedings at law and in equity, the diligent and careful plaintiff is favoured and prejudicial of him who is careless. Viewed thus, it is presumed that the appellant has no further cogent reasoning or/and evidence to substantiate the grounds taken in this impugned appeal. It is trite that the onus is on person making the claim, and the primary responsibility/onus/burden for proving the claim made before the tax authorities (Assessing Officers/Appellate Authorities) lies with the assessee/appellant. In the present case, the appellant has not been able to even discharge the primary onus/burden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....veral opportunities were given to the appellant, he has not responded for the reasons best known to him. Needless to mention that in order to prove his point, the appellant has to substantiate and back his point by providing relevant details, which he has failed to do so. 5.8 Relevant contents of the order u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 25.05.2023 is extracted below: 5.9 In view of the above, in the pertaining and circumstances of the case, I find no infirmity in the action of the AO for adding Rs. 1,13,02,086/- as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. In this view of the matter, the decision of the AO is upheld. Consequently, the Grounds of the appellant is dismissed. 5.10 Before parting, it is trite that an appellate authority is essentially called upon to balance the two sides of an argument presented before him as held in Nirmal Singh and Others of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court [Cr No. 3791 of 2013 (O&M) dated 01.05.2014] and in the absence of any reasonable, cogent and valid arguments/contentions advanced by the appellant in the instant appeal to counter the AO's decision as contained in the assessment order, as mentioned ea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he aforesaid email communication attached therewith the impugned notices i.e., notice dated 29.03.2024 is extracted hereunder as an example for the sake of clarity: 12. Backed by aforesaid submissions, it was the prayer that on this ground itself the order passed u/s 250 of the Act is liable to be set aside. 13. Per contra, Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR, representing the revenue have placed her strong reliance on the orders of revenue authorities and have requested to uphold the same. 14. We have considered the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and the judicial pronouncements relied upon. Ostensibly, the facts placed before us by the Ld. AR that the assessee was not validly put to notice by the Ld. CIT(A), by serving the notices on the email ID preferred by him, therefore, the principle of natural justice has been violated, found to be correct. Under such circumstances, the multiple legal contentions raised by the Ld. AR representing the case of the assessee are not there before the Ld. CIT(A), though a legal ground challenging the issue of limitation while passing the order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act was assailed by the assessee, but in absence ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tax Organes, Gommesort of inou Personal Information : Name of Entity CHETAN SAHU PAN BRWPS3657R TAN Address ZORA PARA, NEAR YADAV KIRANA STORERaipur, Raipur H.O, RAIPUR, Chhattisgarh, INDIA, 492001 Mobile No. 9827188494 STD code Landline No. [email protected] om Email Address Whether notices/communication may be sent on email? Yes Document 2 CHETAN SAMJ - e Dashboard eFle - Authorized Partners . Services - Pending Actions - LIS Grievances - Hel Dashboard . Penang Actions » e Proceedings » View Notices . Detailed Notors Notice/Letter pdf Notice: Communication Reference KO 100077100049 Date Prom Ta CC [email protected] DTBAJHearing Notice u's 250of income Tax Act 1961. Dear CHETAN SAHU. Please find attached the Notice urs 250 for PAN BRWPS36578 and A.Y. 2014-15. Please quote your PAN in all future correspondences Note: . This communication is computer generated and may not concain signature . This communication may be treated as compliant with the requirements of incarse Tax Budes 197 and 1974 - Signed copy map be sent separately if not already digitaly signed.....