IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2005/Del/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16)

ITA No.2006/Del/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2016-17)

Seema Goel, CIT(A), EC-9, Inderpuri, Delhi.

New Delhi-110012. Vs.

PAN:ABRPG1763G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Shri Ved Jain, Advocate, Shri Pawan Garg, CA and Ms. Ishika Dua, CA Department by Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT- DR and Shri Pradumana Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 03.09.2025 Date of pronouncement 03.09.2025

O R D E R

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM:

Both the appeals are filed by the assessee against the common order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), [“CIT(A)”, in short] National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 17.01.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for Asst. Years 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively.

2. Since, facts in both the appeals are similar except issues and grounds of appeal thus they are taken together and decided by a common order. We first take up the appeal in ITA No.2005/Del/2025 for Assessment Year 2015-

16 for adjudication.

3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a resident individual and filed her return of income on 31.03.201 declaring total income of Rs.27,83,470/-. The case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act by issue of notice u/s 148 on 19.04.2021, copy of the same is placed in PB-4 of the assessee.

In terms of the decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India and Ors. vs. Ashish Agarwal in Civil Appeal No.3005/2022 dated 04.05.2022, the said notice was deemed to have been issued as show cause notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act and consequently, after receiving the submission from the assessee, order u/s 148A(d) was passed on dated 28.07.2022 which was digitally signed on 29.7.2022 and notice u/s 148 was issued on 28.07.2022, copy of the same is placed at PB pages 25 to 26. Thereafter, the re-assessment proceedings were completed, and order was passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act wherein additions of Rs.59,95,80,000/- were made in the hands of the assessee by treating the long terms capital gains as unexplained. Against the said order an appeal was filed before the Ld. CIT(A)

who dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4. Aggrieved by the said order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal wherein the assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:

“1. Based on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment order of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“Act’) dated 30.05.2023 passed by the Ld. AO is bad in law and same is liable to be caused to the extent is being arbitrary and against the principle of natural justice.

2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. Assessing Officer has assessed the income as per the provisions of section 144 by making additions u/s 69A on account of unexplained money, amounting to Rs.59,18,00,000/- (amount received from 636 investors of AMR customers) and further initiated up penalty U/s 271 (1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.”

5. Thereafter, the assessee has also taken additional grounds of appeal, wherein the assessee has challenged the proceedings initiated by issue of notice u/s 148 passed order u/s 148A(d) of the Act on the ground of limitation. The additional grounds of appeal are as under:

“7. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre ["CIT(A)"] is bad, both in the eyes of law and on facts.

8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order despite the fact that the notice issued under section 148A(b), order passed under section 148A(d), notice issued under section 148 of the Act and consequent reassessment order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act by the AO are illegal, invalid, without jurisdiction and barred by limitation.

9. On