ORDER
Anadee Nath Misshra, Accountant Member.- This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi, dated 12.02.2025, for the AY 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’) erred in confirming validity of assessment framed u/s.148 of the Act.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’) erred in not condoning delay of 127 days in the filing of the appeal before it.
3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’) erred in confirming addition u/s.69-A in a sum of Rs.2,82,95,535/-.”
(A.1) The present appeal has been filed beyond the time prescribed under section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay in filing of the present appeal. The learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection to condonation of delay, as requested by the appellant assessee. In view of the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned under section 253(5) of the Act and the appeal is admitted.
(B) In this case original assessment order dated 27.11.2018 was passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) whereby the returned income was accepted without disturbing the same. Subsequently, fresh assessment order dated 28.03.2022 was passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act wherein addition of Rs. 2,82,95,535/- was made on account of cash deposited in Bank, which was treated by the Assessing Officer as unexplained money within the meaning of section 69A of the Act. During the proceedings under section 147 of the Act, a show-cause notice dated 25.03.2022 was sent by the Assessing Officer to the assessee. In response, the assessee filed a reply as under:
“Dear sir, Maharana Pratap Polytechnic Society is a charitable society running a government aided college. Students deposit fees directly into the bank and intimates and forward deposit slip to the college for reconciliation. Amount Rs. 28295535/- in the notice deposited as cash in the bank account on various days is fees deposited by students. Kindly let us know if any other information is required. Hope you will find the the information in order”
(C) The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee’s reply on the ground that it lacked corroborative evidences. The Assessing Officer went ahead and passed the aforesaid assessment order dated 28.03.2022 wherein the aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,82,95,935/- was added. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order dated 28.03.2022 was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 12.02.2025. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A). In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [‘ITAT’ for short] foregoing documents were filed, from the assessee’s side.
(D) At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee contended that initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act was not valid because the same had already been examined in the original assessment proceedings leading to the aforesaid assessment order dated 27.11.2018. In this regard, he drew our attention to paragraphs-2 and 3 of assessment order dated 28.03.2022 wherein the Assessing Officer has recorded observations regarding assessment order dated 27.11.2018. For the ease of reference, paragraphs-2 and 3 of assessment order dated 28.03.2022 are reproduced below:
“2. The information has been received from the ITO (I&CI), Gorakhpur that the assessee has deposited the cash to the tune of Rs.2,82,95,535/-. As seen from the report, it is noticed that the ITO (I&CI), Gorakhpur has issued a letter u/s. 133(6) to the assessee on 09-04-2018 calling for the information basing on the information of cash deposits made by the assessee amounting to Rs.2,82,95,535/-in his possession. In response, the assessee has complied with on 12-11-2018 and explained that the sources for the cash deposits were made out of the fee collections of the students who deposit the fee directly into the bank account of the college. Further explained that the books of accounts have been audited and copy of the final audit statement alongwith audit report is already deposited. The entire fee collections is deposited in cash at bank counter and the amount of deposit of cash is properly accounted for. The required documents have been provided for your verification. The assessee has also filed the power of attorney, copy of the 12A registration granted by CIT(E), Lucknow, copy of the ITR for the AY 2016-17, computation of total income, tax audit report in form No. 10B, Income & Expenditure account and Balance sheet.
3. Subsequently, the case has been selected for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) on 27-11-2018 and the income returned was accepted.”
(D.1) The learned Departmental Representative relied on the assessment order and on the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A).
(E) On careful perusal of the observations recorded by the Assessing Officer at paragraph 2 and 3 of the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 reproduced in foregoing paragraph (D) of this order; it is found that the issue regarding cash deposits in the Bank A/c was already examined by the Assessing Officer during original assessment proceedings leading to aforesaid assessment order dated 27.11.2018 whereby the assessee’s returned income was accepted and no addition was made. Therefore, it is obvious that the addition made in reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act leading to aforesaid assessment order dated 28.03.2022 was nothing but review and change of opinion on the same facts. It is well-settled that reassessment proceedings are not meant for change of opinion or for review of the earlier decision. The addition of aforesaid amount of Rs. 2,82,95,935/-made in the aforesaid assessment order dated 28.03.2022 was, therefore, nothing but review and change of opinion of the earlier view taken by the Assessing Officer in the earlier assessment order dated 27.11.2018.By doing so, the Assessing Officer travelled beyond the scope of the reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. In view of the foregoing, it is held that the initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act was not valid in the eyes of law. Accordingly the aforesaid assessment order dated 28.03.2022 is hereby annulled.
(E.1) Even on merits, we find that the Assessing Officer issued a show-cause notice on 25.03.2022 (Friday) and passed the assessment order, in a hasty manner, on 28.03.2022 (Monday) leaving only two days in the intervening period i.e. 26th and 27th March, which were holidays on account of Saturday & Sunday. Despite the extremely short period between the date of show-cause notice and date of assessment order, the assessee filed a reply in the intervening period which is referred to in foregoing paragraph (B) of this order. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee’s reply on the ground that it lacked corroborative evidences. There is nothing on record, however, to show what corroborative evidences were required to be filed by the assessee. Further, due to extremely short period available between showcause notice and the eventual assessment order, it is an infallible inference, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that the Assessing Officer failed to provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee. In any case, the corroborative evidences have already been recorded by the Assessing Officer himself in paragraph- 2 and 3 of the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 [referred to in foregoing paragraph (D) of this order]. Therefore, even on merits, because of failure of the Assessing Officer to provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee, the aforesaid addition of Rs. 2,82,95,935/- deserves to be deleted.
(F) All the grounds of appeal are treated as disposed off in accordance with the aforesaid decisions, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
