Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Patna
Ganesh Dubey,New Delhi vs Dcwt, Central Circle-2, Patna on 6 April, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
"PATNA BENCH, PATNA
VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA
Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and
Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member
WTA Nos. 01, 02, 03, 04 &05/Pat/2025
Assessment Years: 1995-96, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04
Ganesh Dubey...........................................................Appellant
E-195, Greater Kailash-II
New Delhi-110048
[PAN No. AAGPD8257L]
vs.
ACWT, Central Circle-2, Patna ......................................Respondent
Appearances by:
Shri Vishal Kumar, AR, appeared on behalf of the Appellant.
Shri Manab Adak, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent.
Date of concluding the hearing : April 06, 2026
Date of pronouncing the order : April 06, 2026
ORDER
Per Bench:
The present appeals being WTA No(s). 01, 02, 03, 04 & 05 for the assessment year 1995-96, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 respectively have been filed by the same assessee directed against the separate orders, all dated 24.01.2025 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna (hereinafter referred to as "the ld. CIT(A)"), passed under u/s 23 of the Wealth Income Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
WTA No.01 to 05/Pat/2025 Ganesh Dubey Since the issue involve in all these appeals are common except for figures and respective assessment years, all the five appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
For the sake of convenience, first, we take up WTA No. 01/Pat/2025 is taken as the lead case and the findings therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to all other appeals.
2. Brief facts of the case are that, in the case of assessee, a search and seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 13.01.2000 at the residential premises at Ranchi and Delhi. The main allegation was that the assessee was involved in Fodder scam in the Animal Husbandry, Government of Bihar. It was alleged that his two other brothers were also involved in the same scam and they have earned money out of fraudulent withdrawal of Government Treasury and have invested money in the acquisition of several movable and immovable properties. Accordingly, order u/s 158BC was completed on 31.01.2000 on a total undisclosed income of Rs.4,29,24,285/-. It was also found that the assessee had made investments in several movable/immovable properties either in his own name or in the name of his family members/relatives out of misappropriated funds drawn by the assessee from the Animal Husbandry Department. Considering the year wise investment made in different immovable properties, the assessee was liable to file wealth tax return as wealth was chargeable to wealth Tax Act. But no wealth tax return was filed by the assessee. Accordingly, for the assessment year 1995-96, the case of assessee was reopened u/s 17 after getting approval of the Add. CIT, Central Range-1, Patna and the Ld. Assessing Officer passed an order u/s 16(5) r.w.s. 17 of the Act determine total income at Rs.1,65,59,480/-.
2WTA No.01 to 05/Pat/2025 Ganesh Dubey
3. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer.
4. Aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR stated that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law, therefore liable to be set aside. He further stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to adjudicate the various grounds raised before him in proper prospective and has arbitrarily rejected and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, the impugned order needs to be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the decision of the authorities below.
6. We, after hearing the rival submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, on examination of the record, we found that assessee has raised various grounds before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the contention of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to adjudicate the various grounds raised in the appeal in proper prospective and without looking into facts of this case. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, another chance may be given to the assessee so as assessee can substantiate its claim before the Ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, remand back the whole issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for the statistical purpose.
3WTA No.01 to 05/Pat/2025 Ganesh Dubey
7. The other connected appeals being WTA No(s).02 to 05/Pat/2025 are identical to the facts of the ITA No.01/Pat/2025. Accordingly, our findings recorded in ITA No.01/Pat/2025 will apply mutatis mutandis in these appeals as well. Accordingly, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
Kolkata, the 06th April, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/-
[Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma]
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 06.04.2026.
DP, PS
Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Appellant -
2. Respondent -
3. CIT(A)-
4. CIT-
5. CIT(DR)
//True copy//
By order
Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches
4