DHARAMBIR SINGH,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO WARD - 1, ROHTAK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that while the assessee was negligent, the Assessing Officer did not inquire into the explanation offered regarding streedhan. To ensure natural justice, the order was set aside and the assessment was restored for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- on account of cash deposits during demonetization, as the assessee did not attend proceedings despite notices. The CIT(A) upheld this addition. The assessee claimed the deposits were from his wife's streedhan and cash in hand.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition made on account of cash deposits without proper inquiry into the explanation provided by the assessee violates principles of natural justice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal centre, Delhi, dated 6.4.2021, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“Ground no. 1 The Learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in completing the assessment ex-parte, with total disregard to the facts and circumstances of the case.
Dharambir Singh Vs. ITo Ground no. 2 The Learned CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making an additoin of Rs. 1000000/- u/s 69A on account of alleged cash deposits forming part of streedhan and cash in hand, which was duly explained and substantiated. Ground no. 3 The Learned CIT(A) has failed to appeciate the said sum was kept with wife after retirement for security of the family. Ground no. 4 The Learned CIT(A) has further erred in taxing the said u/s 115BBE of the Act, with total disregard to the facts and circumstancs of the case. Ground no. 5 The assessee reserves its right to add, amend, alter or delete any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”
2. The only effective ground is against addition of Rs. 10,00,000/-. Facts giving rise to the prsent appeal are that the Assessing Officer was in possession of SFT information which stated that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 12,00,000/- in his bank account in Syndicate Bank and Oriental Bank of Commerce during the demonetization period i.e. 9.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. The case of the assessee was taken up for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer issued various notices. In response thereof no one attended the proceedings. Therefore, the Assessing Officer proceeded to make the addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- and a sum of Rs. 1,92,140/- being the pension received. Aggrieved against this the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals), who after considering the submissions dismissed
Dharambir Singh Vs. ITo the appeal. Aggrieved against this, now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
At the time of hearing no one attended the proceedings. It is seen from the record that the assessee has not been attendig the proceedings despite various opportunities. Notices sent through speed post have been returned back. The appeal, therefore, was taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee.
Learned Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee has been thoroughly negligent and did not even appear before the assessing authority.
I have heard learned Sr. DR and perused the material available on record. I find that the Assessing Officer has recorded that various opportunities were given but no one attended the proceedings. However, it is seen tha the Assessing Officer has also mentioned about the explanation offered by the assessee about the source of the deposit being the istridhan of his wife. No inquiry was made on this aspect.
Therefore, to sub-serve the interest of natural justice and to give the assessee an opportunity of hearing, the impugned order is set aside and the assessment is restored to the file of the Assessing authority for making assessment afresh after giving opportunity to the assessee of being heard.
Dharambir Singh Vs. ITo 6. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order was pronounced in open court on 18th Aug. 2022. However, written order is signed and delivered today. Order pronounced in open court on 31st August, 2022.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Shree Hanumant Steel Traders vs. Assistant CommissionerChhattisgarh · 1 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
