IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, DELHI BEFORE SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER &

SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2760/Del/2025 (Assessment Year:2018-19)

Ravindra Kumar Gupta C/o CA Vaibhav Goel 75 Navyug Market 1 s t Floor, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh – 201002	Vs. DCIT, Circle 5(3)(1)	GB Nagar Aaykar Bhavan, A-2D, Sector – 24 Noida, UP- 201307
(cid:1)थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AHMPG9176E
Appellant .. Respondent

Date of Hearing 10.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.01.2026 O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated

24.02.2025 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN &Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073629645(1) arising out of the assessment order dated 27.03.2023 u/s 147/144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the NFAC, Delhi for AY: 2018-19.

2. Heard and perused the records. The assessee is an individual and the return of income was filed declaring income of Rs.1,10,90,564/- and during the assessment proceeding the case was picked up for scrutiny and the scrutiny assessment was completed at returned income. Subsequently the case of the assessee was reopened for the reason that assessee has taken unsecured loans from dummy entities. The assessee has replied and order u/s 144A(d) of the Act was passed and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued. Assessee filed return in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act on 03.05.2022. During the reassessment the assessee filed replies, however, an addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 r.w.s 115BBE was made which has been sustained by ld. CIT(A) for which assesseeis in appeal before this Tribunal and what ld. Counsel contended primarily was that assessment has been completed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act and new intangible fresh material was not supplied to the assessee at the time of reopening. In this regard, decision of the Coordinate Bench in ITO Vs. BC Enterprises in ITA No. 4972/Del/2024 was relied wherein relying the decision of Hon’bel Supreme Court in the case of Ashish Aggrawal (2022) (5) TME 240 (SC) the Coordinate Bench has held that failure of Assessing Officer to supply material relied upon for initiating proceeding u/s 148A of the Act is fatal.

3. Though ld. DR has defended the issue before us and contended that no such issue has been raised before the Ld. CIT(A),we find that assessee had raised ground No. 1 broadly covering the objections. Even otherwise ground Nos. 2 & 4 as raised before us are legal in nature and can be decided on admitted facts.

4. Now, what we find from the copy of show cause notice issued u/s 148A(b) of the Act, dated 12.03.2022, available at page No. 4-6 of the paper book and that very broadly allegations have been made that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was conducted by the department on M/s K K Spun India Ltd. on 23.03.2021. During further enquiry, it was found that the assessee has received unsecured loans from various dummy companies giving accommodative entries which were linked with the above-mentioned company.

5, It comes up from this notice absolutely no details with regard to amount of unsecured loans and the details of alleged dummy companies is mentioned. The reopening merely mentions that a search was conducted on M/s KK Spun India Ltd. on 23.03.2021 and assessee was found to have received unsecured loans from various dummy companies and there is no allegation of any information available suggesting income chargeable to tax escaping assessment. Assessee has provided copy of reply dated 19.03.2022 available at page No. 7-44 wherein in response to show cause notice dated 12.03.2022 assessee had provided details of entity providing unsecured loans including from ledger account, confirmation, bank account and ITR. It comes up from this reply that

Click Here to Read the rest of this document