BIJAY KUMAR SWAIN,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 19.12.2023 in Appeal No. in Appeal No.NFAC/2012- 13/10150448 relating to the assessment year 2013-14. 14.

The appeal is time barred by 17 days. The assessee has filed The appeal is time barred by 17 days. The assessee has filed The appeal is time barred by 17 days. The assessee has filed a condonation petition supported by petition supported by an affidavit, inter alia, stating that due , inter alia, stating that due to his high blood pressure and prolonged illness, he was advised by the his high blood pressure and prolonged illness, he was advised by the his high blood pressure and prolonged illness, he was advised by the doctor to take one month rest. Therefore, there was doctor to take one month rest. Therefore, there was a delay of 17 days in P a g e 1 | 5 filing of the appeal before the Tribunal, which was not intentional. Ld Sr DR did not raise any serious objection to the condonation of delay.

After going through the condonation petition, we find that the assessee has a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time. The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Ganga Sahai Ram Swarup and another vs. ITAT, 271 ITR 512 (All) held that the delay of short period should be condoned because the assessee was not going to gain anything out of it. We, therefore, condone the delay of 17 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for hearing.

Although a number of grounds have been raised, however, all these relate to the exparte order of ld CIT(A), NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.60,54,007/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 69A of the I.T.Act, 1961 being the cash deposit in the bank account.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and is a non-filer of income tax return. It was observed from the individual transaction statement (ITS) available with the department that the assessee has made cash deposit of Rs.60,54,007/- in his Saving Bank account and earned interest income of Rs.11,97,600/-. Therefore, the Assessing Officer, after recording reasons, reopened the case of the assessee u/s.147 of the Act and thereafter issued notice u/s.148 of the Act on 31.3.2021. Since the P a g e 2 | 5 assessee did not file any return in response to the same and did not respond to the subsequent notice u/s.142(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice u/s 144 of the Act asking the assessee to explain as to why the assessment should not be completed u/s.144 of the Act by making the addition of the same. Thereafter, the assessee filed the return of income on 12.3.2022 i.e. at the fag end of the time limit declaring total income Rs.4,08,200/-.

Since the assessee thereafter did not file any response to the subsequent notice issued, the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s.147/144B of the Act made addition of Rs.64,62,210/- u/s,. \69A being the cash deposit in the bank account of the assessee as unexplained.

Since the assessee did not appear before the ld CIT(A) despite number of opportunities granted, the ld CIT(A) NFAC in the exparte order passed sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

Aggrieved with the impugned order, the assessee has filed appeal before the Tribunal.

Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to death of the mother of the assessee and subsequent sickness of the assessee who is a senior citizen, the assesse could not produce the necessary evidences, leading to these unfortunate events. He submitted that if an opportunity is P a g e 3 | 5 granted, the assessee would be in a position to file the requisite details before the lower authorities to substantiate his case.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. On perusal of the assessment order, we find that due to non-submission of details to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer regarding the source of cash deposits in the Saving Bank, the Assessing Officer made the addition of Rs.64,62,210/- as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act. We find that despite number of opportunities granted by the ld CIT(A), the assessee did not make any submission for which the ld CIT(A) was constrained to pass the exparte order. It is the submission of ld AR that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details. Considering the totality of the facts of the case, and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the matter to the file of the ld CIT(A) with a direction to give one last opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to make his submission on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under P a g e 4 | 5 any pretext failing which, the ld CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.