आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.09.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2014-15.

2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :-

“1. The assessment order passed u/s 147 be declared as Null and void as it is not passed in accordance with law.

2. The notice issued u/s 147 by JAO is invalid as it was supposed to be issued by FAO, therefore the proceedings u/s 147 initiated against me may please be declared as null and void.

3. The Ld. AO erred in making (CIT-A erred in confirming) addition of Rs.50,65,000/- u/s 69A of the IT Act.

3.1 The Ld. AO and Ld. CIT-A ought to have appreciated all the evidence produced and ought to have considered the fact that cash deposit of Rs.50,65,000/- is out of genuine and explained sources.

4. The appellant craves its right to add to or alter the Grounds of Appeal at any time before or during the course of hearing of the case.”

3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business activity such as dairy farming, hiring of tractors, agricultural equipment and also having rental income from marriage hall and has not furnished his return of income for the year under consideration. On the basis of information available with the Department that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.50,65,000/- in his bank account maintained with PDCC Bank Ltd., Pune, during the year under consideration, however, no return of income was furnished, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act. After passing order u/s 148A(d) of the IT Act on 18.07.2022, notice u/s 148 of the IT Act was issued on 19.07.2022. Assessee furnished return of income on 27.09.2022 in response to above notice by declaring income of Rs.8,85,570/-. Subsequently, notices u/s 143(2), 142(1) and show cause notice respectively were issued to the assessee. After considering the reply and submissions of the assessee, vide order dated 23.05.2023 the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by determining income of Rs.59,50,570/- as against the income of Rs.8,85,570/- returned by the assessee. The above assessed income includes the addition of Rs.50,65,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the IT Act deposited in bank accounts.

4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. After considering the reply and submissions of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the addition of Rs.50,65,000/- u/s 69A of the IT Act made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.

5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

6. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book and written submissions furnished by the assessee, as well as by Ld. DR. We find that the counsel of the assessee furnished an application through which the ground no.2 relating to JAO/ FAO issue was withdrawn, accordingly the same is dismissed as withdrawn.

7. With regard to ground no.1, we find that it is the contention of the assessee that the reassessment order dated 23.05.2023 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act is null and void since the notice issued u/s 148 of the IT Act is time barred being issued beyond the surviving period of limitation prescribed/approved by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI vs. Rajiv Bansal (2024) 469 ITR 46 (SC).

8. In this regard, we find that the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 148 of the IT Act on 29.06.2021. Subsequently, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agarwal, reported in [2022] 444 ITR 1 (SC), original notice issued u/s 148 on 29.06.2021 was deemed to be issued u/s 148A(b) of the IT Act. Vide show cause notice dated 23.05.2022, the information and material relied upon by the Revenue was provided to