TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1706
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to take steps for filing of the appeal within the period of limitation. After recovering from the ailment, the assessee filed the present appeal after the delay of 32 days, which is neither intentional nor willful, but due to the reason of ill health. Thus, the Ld.AR has pleaded that the delay of 32 days in filing the present appeal may be condoned. 3. On the other hand, the Ld. DR has not seriously objected to the condonation of delay, when the assessee has filed the medical certificate and was suffering from the disease during the period. 4. We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee in the application in para 3 and 4 as under : 3. That I was suffering from Viral illness/fever, cold and cough from 25-10-2024 to 15- 11-2024 and subsequently, I am directed to take bed rest for two weeks' time by the doctor, therefore appeal could not be filed. In this regard, copy of the medical certificate is enclosed herewith. 4. That I have signed all the documents on 30/11/2024 as I am able to sign on 30-11- 2024 and thereafter I handed over the documents to My council, Mr. Tailor Nagendra Reddy and subsequent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orrect. Therefore, initiation of proceedings by the jurisdictional assessing officer, u/s. 148A(A), 148 & 147 of the I-T Act, 1961, are invalid on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, and simply relied on the SFT information module of Insight Portal at the time of reopening, however, either no information gathered or nor conducted any further inquiry in order to form honest and a reasonable belief that certain income had escaped assessment in the case of the appellant. As such, said proceedings and the consequent order ought to be declared null and void-ab-initio. 6. The appellant submits, with regard to ground no. 3 before the CIT(A), that holding by the Ld. CIT (A) that the assessee has not given any submissions is not correct. The appellant further submits that he has participated in assessment proceedings and accordingly replied partially on 03-01-2024 against SCN u/s. 144 vide Notice No. ITBA/AST/F/144(SCN)(F)/2023-24/1058534293(1),dated 07-12-2023 and also requested adjournment on 13-02-2024 against the final SCN vide No. ITBA/AST/F/147(SCN)/2023-24/1060566454(1) dated 06-02-2024, but without considering the request, the subject assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd accordingly the said proceedings and the consequent order ought to be declared null and void ab initio. 9. The appellant submits, with regard to ground no. 6 before the CIT(A), that holding by the Ld. CIT (A) that the assessee has not given any submissions is not correct. The appellant further submits that u/s. 69A and Section 147 r.w.s 144B addition made by violating the provisions of the Act. The appellant also submits that the Assessment Unit / NaFAC erred on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, by making the addition of Rs. 42,00,400.00 as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act Rs. 7,30,913.00 as unexplained investment and Rs. 31,93,100.00 as unexplained in the order of assessment passed u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 01.03.2024 without appreciating and analysing the facts properly and thereby, such additions need to be deleted. 10. The appellant submits, with regard to ground no.7 before the CIT(A), that holding by the Ld. CIT (A) that the assessee merely stating a credit without clarifying the sources for cash deposits made in to the bank account, no submissions, no evidence or no supporting documents, are provided excep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... The appellant further submits that passing the assessment Order u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act is illegal and not judicious. The appellant also submits that assessment Unit/ NaFAC erred both on facts and in law treating the timber obtained from the forest department an amount of Rs. 31,93,100.00 as unexplained without considering the certificates for purchase of timber from the forest department produced by the appellant and the payments for which were made from the same bank account of the appellant i.e., SBH Savings Bank A/ c No. 52200564214, Godavarikhani Branch, Karimnagar and such action of the assessment unit cannot be held as legal and judicious. 13. The appellant submits, with regard to ground no.10 before the CIT(A), that the assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the I.T Act 1961 is an arbitrary and bad in law and needs to be annulled. The appellant further submits that the JAO and Assessment Unit/NaFAC failed to discharge their burden in that regard and proceeded to make the addition solely based on surmises and conjectures relying on a dumb and vague assumption. Thus, the impugned order and the addition made therein deserve to be deleted. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,913.00 in the impugned order. Therefore, the appellant has not made any fresh time deposits during the year in question. Therefore, such receipts i.e. the matured proceedings from the time deposits got credited to his capital accounts which were, hitherto, were standing as credit balance to the ledger of time deposits under the "Current Assets" of the "Balance Sheet". The appellant, in this regard, further submits that the bank receipt vouchers, bank book and general ledger are duly and properly maintained. Hence, treating such matured time deposits as unexplained investment is not correct without considering the facts submitted by the appellant and without verifying the material on record. Therefore, treating such matured time deposits as unexplained investment and treated it as income escaped assessment in the impugned order may be dropped. 16. The appellant submits, with regard to payments made of Rs. 31,93,100.00 to the district forest officer, that as the appellant is into the business of carrying out the carpentry works, as supra mentioned, he has purchased the timber from the forest department which is a raw-material for the appellant's business. Therefore....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-parte order. The Ld. DR has further submitted that even the jurisdictional High Court in the order dated 24.04.2025 has granted liberty to the parties to move appropriate petition, seeking revival of the writ petition in light of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the pending SLP on the very same issue. 9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as material on record. In the case of the assessee, notice u/s 148A(b) was issued on 21.02.2023 by JAO. For ready reference, the same is reproduced as under : 10. Thereafter, the AO also passed an order u/s 148A(d) on 29.03.2023, wherein, the AO has recorded that, despite sufficient time allowed to the assessee in accordance with the provisions of section 148A(b) for compliance to the show cause notice dated 21.02.2023, there is no compliance on behalf of the assessee to the said show cause notice. The AO decided that it is a fit case for issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act and consequently notice u/s 148 was issued on 30.03.2023 as under : 11. Undisputedly, the show cause notice u/s 148A(b) as well as notice u/s 148 were issued by the JAO and not by the faceless Assessing Officer. At the outset, we note that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....W vs. UNION OF INDIA^9, Rajasthan High Court in the case of SHARDA DEVI CHHAJER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANOTHER and batch of writ petitions^10 which stood decided on 19.03.2024. Similar views have also been taken by the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court in the case of GIRDHAR GOPAL DALMIA vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS (M.A.T 1690 of 2023), decided on 25.09.2024. 13. In light of various judgements of the Hon'ble High Courts, including the judgement of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer [2024] 156 taxmann.com 478 (Gauhati), the Hon'ble High Court has held in para 13 to 19 as under : 13. Another aspect which needs to be considered is that in fact it should have been realized by the Income Tax Department itself and should have found out via media in ensuring that proceedings under Sections 148-A and 148 should not have been issued in a faceless manner, at least till the Hon'ble Supreme Court decide the twelve hundred (1200) odd SLPs which it is already seized of or, at least the Income Tax Department should have found out some remedial steps to ensure that wherever the authorities intend to initiate proce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Smt. Godavaridevi Saraf [[1978] 113 ITR 589 (Bombay)] as also the recent decision of the co- ordinate Bench of this Court in Samp Furniture (P) Ltd. v. ITO [[2024] 165 taxmann.com 581/300 Taxman 452 (Bombay).] of which one of us (Justice G.S. Kulkarni) was a member, wherein the Court categorically observed that the Revenue having not "accepted" the judgment of the High Court would not mean that till the same is set aside in a manner known to law, it would loose its binding force. Referring to the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corporation Ltd. [[1992] taxmann.com 16/55 ELT 433 (SC)], the Court observed that the approach of the officials of Revenue of treating decisions being "not acceptable" was criticized by the Supreme Court. In such decision, following are the relevant observations made by the Supreme Court. "6. Sri Reddy is perhaps right in saying that the officers were not actuated by any mala fides in passing the impugned orders. They perhaps genuinely felt that the claim of the assessee was not tenable and that, if it was accepted. the Revenue would suffer. But what Sri Reddy overlooks is that we are not concerned here with th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... requirements of judicial discipline and the need for giving effect to the orders of the higher appellate authorities which are binding on them." 15. What is worrying this Bench more is the fact that an endeavour is being made whole heartedly to ensure not to generate further litigation on issues which have been laid to rest by a large number of High Courts all of whom have taken a consistent stand that the action of the Income Tax Department being violative of the Finance Act, 2020 and Finance Act, 2021. Now, in order to protect the interest of the Revenue as also that of the assessee, it would be trite at this juncture, if we dispose of the writ petition with an observation/direction that the disposal of the instant writ petition in terms of the judgment rendered by this High Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (1 supra) shall however be subject to the outcome of the SLPs which were filed by the Income Tax Department and which is pending consideration before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 16. In the given facts and circumstances, this Bench is of the considered opinion that unless and until we do not timely dispose of matters which are squarely covered....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ravindra Reddy (1 supra) is subjected to challenge before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 3574 of 2024, preferred by the Income Tax Department, we make it clear that allowing of the instant writ petition is subject to outcome of the aforesaid SLP preferred by the Revenue against the decision of this High Court in the case of Kanakala Ravindra Reddy (1 supra). This, in other words, would mean that either of the parties, if they so want, may move an appropriate petition seeking revival of this writ petition in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the pending SLP on the very same issue. 19. Accordingly, the instant writ petition stands allowed in favour of the assessee so far as the issue of jurisdiction is concerned. As a consequence, the impugned notice under challenge under Sections 148-A and 148 stands set aside/quashed. The consequential orders, if any, also stand set aside/quashed in similar terms as have been passed by this High Court in the case of Kankanala Ravindra Reddy (1 supra). There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. 14. Thus, it is clear t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....INCOME TAN DEPARTMENT To, KOTHA KANTHAIAH HNO 7-3-234 JANGAM WARD 8 , JANGAM RAMGUNDAM KARIMNAGAR 505208 , Andhra Pradesh. India PAN: A.Y: Dated: DIN & Notice No: AQBPK7356C 2016-17 21/02/2023 ITBA/AST/F/148A(SCN)/2022- 23/1049973923(1) Notice under clause(b) of section 148A of the Income-tax Act.1961 Sir/Madam/M/s Whereas I have information which suggests that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2016-17 has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The details of the information/ enquiry conducted on which reliance is being placed, along with supporting documents, are enclosed with this notice. 2. You are required to show-cause as to why, in view of the details contained in enclosures mentioned in point number 1 above, a notice section 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961 should not be issued. 3. You may submit your reply to this notice, along with supporting documents (if any) on the above mentioned issues on or before 05/03/2023 electronically at www.incometax.gov.in. LAXMI PAVANA GAYATHRI MUKKERA CIRCLE 1,KARIMNAGAR Document 2 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE INCOME TAX DEPARTME....