IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN “SMC & DB” BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [THROUGH VIRTUAL MODE]

ITA Nos.64, 78 & 79/DDN/2024 [Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2014-15 & 2015-16]

Akhilesh Singhal, vs ITO, 139, Chandreshwar Ward-1(4)(1)

Nagar, Rishikesh Rishikesh Uttarakhand-249201. Uttarakhand-249201 PAN-BVLPS4429Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by Shri Kanwal K.Juneja, Adv. Revenue by Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 04.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 29.10.2025 ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM :

The captioned appeals are filed by the assessee against the order, all dated 03.04.2024 by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)”]. For AY 2014-15 in ITA No. 64/DDN/2024, the order was passed by CIT(A), NFAC in Appeal No. NFAC/2013-14/10149588 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the assessment order dated 31.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act and the remaining two appeals in ITA Nos. 78 & 79/DDN/2024 are filed by the assessee against penalty order, both dated 07.09.2022 passed u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act for Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively.

2. As these three appeals are having the issues which are inter- linked, inter-connected and this fact has been admitted by both the parties during the course of hearing before us, therefore, all three appeals are decided by a common order.

ITA No.64/DDN/2024 [Assessment Year 2014-15]

3. First we take appeal of the assessee in ITA No.64/DDN/2024 for the Assessment Year 2014-15

4. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual, e-filed his return of income on 05.08.2015, declaring total income of INR 22,00,000/-. The case of the assessee was re-opened by issue of notice u/s 148 on 29.03.2021 and assessment was completed u/s 147/144 dated 31.03.2022 wherein addition of INR 27,86,019/- was made on account of deposits in bank account as unexplained u/s 69A of the Act.

5. Against the said order, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 03.04.2024, dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

6. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by taking following grounds of appeal:-

1. “That in facts and circumstances of the case, re-opening of the assessment is non-jurisdictional and on borrowed information, AO has not recorded his independent satisfaction before taking the approval is arbitrary and bad at law.

2. That in facts and circumstances of the case, the higher authorities has failed to record their independent satisfaction and approval has been granted without application of mind and without going through the file and in hasty manner is unjustified and illegal.

3. That in facts and circumstances of the case, the AO has taken the credit side of the amount deposited in bank, as income of the assessee without consideration an amount which has been transferred from one account to another account has not been considered is erroneous and superfluous.

4. That in facts and circumstances of the case, that the AO only taken the credit side amount of deposit to the bank without considering an amount withdrawn. AO has failed to work the peak credit of the bank and workout correct credits of the bank which has not been calculated and taken into consideration is unwarranted and illegal.

5. That in facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has not consider the submission and evidence filed before him is unfair and uncalled.

6. That in facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) relied upon the earlier year receipt which was low stating AO has not substantiated with sufficient reason for huge increase in sale without going through the submission and records is illogical and bad at law.

7. That in facts and circumstances of the case, and addition of Rs.27, 86,019/- may kindly be deleted.

8. That in facts and circumstances of the case, the charging of interes