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 Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 25/09/2025 for the Assessment Year 2011-12.

2. The grounds of Appeal are as under:

“1. That the impugned assessment order dated 27/12/2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12 passed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) deserves to be quashed/annulled because:

a) Initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act is bad in law.

b) There is no proper application of mind on the part of the A.O. so as to come to an independent satisfaction that he had reason to believe that income and escaped assessment.

c) There is no close nexus or live link between the material and reason to believe that income had escaped assessment.

d) No approval has been obtained from the competent authority u/s 151 of the Act.

2. That without prejudice to Ground No. 1 above, the impugned assessment order dated 27/12/2018 for Assessment Year 2011-12 passed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act deserves to be quashed/annulles as mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was not issued to the Appellant pursuant to filing of the income tax return.

3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,41,65,000/- u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash deposits in Axis bank Account No. 9100200198883351 in the name of partnership firm M/s Ravi Chopra & Associates. At any rate, such addition as confirmed is very excessive.

4. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,50,000/- u/s 68 of the Act on account of cash deposits in HDFC bank Account No. 02942560002050 in the name of partnership firm M/s Ravi Chopra & Associates. At any rate, such addition as confirmed is very excessive.”

3. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee filed return of income for the year under consideration declaring an income of Rs. 4,32,400/-. The assessment was reopened on the basis of information regarding ‘large cash deposits in Assessee’s bank account’. An assessment order came to be passed under Section 143(3) r.w. Section 147 of the Act on 27/12/2018 by making an addition of Rs. 1,80,15,000/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) treating the cash deposits made in the bank accounts as unexplained. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 27/12/2018, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 25/09/2025, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Assessee preferred the captioned Appeal.

4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee canvassing on Ground No. 1 of the Assessee submitted that the impugned assessment order should have been quashed by the Ld. CIT(A) as there is no application of mind on the part of the A.O. so as to come to an independent satisfaction that he had ‘reason to believe’ that income had escaped assessment. Further submitted that there is no close nexus or live link between the material and the reason to believe that, the income has escaped assessment. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the A.O. initiated proceedings u/s 147/148 of the Act merely on suspicion for making ‘fishing and roving’ enquiry and not because he had ‘reason to believe’ that income had escaped assessment. The Ld. Counsel has also relied on the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator India Ltd. (2010) 320 ITR 561(S.C). Further submitted that the proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act has been initiated merely on the basis of information received from Investigating Wing, New Delhi and the A.O. has not made any independent enquiries. Thus, submitted that the assessment order is required to be quashed at the hands of the Tribunal. In order to support the said contention, the Ld. Assessee's Representative relied on plethora of judicial precedents and sought for allowing the Ground No. 1 of the Asses