KRISHNAMURTHY RAVI,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(6), BANGALORE

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 06.05.2022. The relevant assessment year is 2017-2018.

There is a delay of 31 days in filing this appeal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay accompanied by an affidavit stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. We have perused the reasons stated in the affidavit for filing this appeal belatedly. We find that there is sufficient cause for the late filing of the appeal and the delay cannot be attributed to the assessee. Hence, we condone the delay and proceeded to dispose of the appeal on merits.

The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee an individual had filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-2018 on 14.07.2017 declaring total income of Rs.4,64,690. The assessment was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS to verify the “cash deposits during the demonetization period”. The assessee had made cash deposits of Rs.6 lakh on 15.11.2016 in his bank account maintained with M/s. Sri M.Visvesvaraya Co-operative Bank Limited. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act vide order dated 07.12.2019 by treating the cash deposits amounting to Rs.6 lakh as unexplained income u/s 69A of the I.T.Act.

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority. The assessee was directed to furnish written submission in support of its grounds. The assessee submitted an adjournment application for filing the written submission. However, the CIT(A) decided the issue ex parte by dismissing the appeal.

Aggrieved, the assessee has filed elaborate grounds running into 8 pages. The prayer raised before the Tribunal reads as follows:-

The learned AR submitted that the assessee had filed an adjournment application for seeking time to furnish the written submission before the first appellate authority and the CIT(A) without considering the same, has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. In this context, the learned AR referred to Annexure-A in the appeal memo (the acknowledgement of adjournment requested dated 07.04.2022). The learned AR submitted that the issue may be restored to the files of the CIT(A) for a proper adjudication of the issue after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the A.O. and the CIT(A).

We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has not submitted arguments / submissions nor furnished any evidence in support of his claim. The appeal has been decided ex parte on the material available on record. This is evident from para 5.6 and 5.7 of the impugned order of the CIT(A). In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.