IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCHES ‘B’ ‘NEW DELHI’

BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2732/DEL/2025 (A.Y 2012-13)

Sh. Atar Singh Vs Income Tax Officer House No. 5, Village, Gazipur, Ward 1(1)

Gazipur Road, Faridabad, Faridabad, Haryana Haryana-121005 122001 PAN: DMPPS6598B Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. S.S. Nagar, CA Revenue by Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29/10/2025 Date of Pronouncement 19/12/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal, Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)/’NFAC’ for short), dated 25/02/2025for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“1.0 That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the disallowance, imposition of tax, and interest with reference thereto, as well as the quantification of taxable income and tax liability, are unjustified, erroneous, and unsustainable, and it is prayed that necessary directions be issued to the Learned Assessing Officer (Ld. AO) to grant appropriate relief fin accordance with the law.

2.0 That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of Ld. AO without considering the fact that no reasons to believe recorded by the Ld. AO u/s 148 of the Act has been provided to the appellant.

3.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of the Ld. AO without considering the fact that proceedings u/s 148 is also not justifiable since mere cash deposit in bank account does not amount to escaped income.

4.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of the Ld. AO without appreciating the fact that mere deposit of cash, information of which are received from Annual Information Return (i.e. AIR) could not be the basis for re-opening of assessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act.

5.0 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred without substantiate the fact that no approval accorded u/s 151 of the Act by the Ld. AO has been provided to the appellant.

6.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of the Ld. AO without appreciating the fact that section 69A of the Act is not applicable in this case.

7.0 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) has erred in upholding the order of the Ld. AO without considering the fact that ex-parte order has been passed without providing reasonable opportunity to the appellant.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee is an agriculturist. Assessment proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short)were initiated based on the AIR Information that the Assessee deposited cash of Rs. 95,23,000/- in his saving bank account. An approval u/s 151(1) of the Act came to be issued on 26/03/2019 by the Pr. Commissioern of Income Tax, Faridabad. An assessment order came to be passed u/s 147/144 of the Act on

10/12/2019, wherein the Ld. A.O. made addition of Rs. 1,02,73,000/- by treating the cash deposits out of undisclosed source of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 10/12/2019, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 25/02/2025, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 25/02/2025, Assessee preferred the present Appeal on the grounds mentioned above.

4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the reasons to believe recorded on 15/03/2019 by the A.O. is without application of mind, therefore, the same is invalid. Further, the Ld. Assessee's Representative drawn our attention to the ‘Reasons to Believe’ and submitted that there is a clear contradiction at Para 1 and para 3 of the rea