Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's return for AY 2011-12 was initially processed. Subsequently, the AO reopened the assessment under section 147 based on information about a cash deposit of Rs. 11,50,000/-. The assessee remained non-compliant despite multiple notices and ex-parte assessment proceedings were completed under section 144, with the addition of Rs. 11,50,000/-.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing sufficient cause and the principle of substantial justice. The matter was remanded to the AO for de novo adjudication, allowing the assessee one more opportunity to present evidence, subject to payment of costs.
Key Issues
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal and to grant an opportunity for de novo adjudication by the AO.
Sections Cited
144, 147, 253(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 17.01.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Jaipur [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 26.11.2018 passed by learned ITO-4(3), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2011-12, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds as mentioned in Form No. 36 (Appeal Memo).
Page 1 of 6
Haseena Begum ITA No. 927/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12
The registry has informed that the present appeal is delayed and
therefore time-barred. The assessee has filed an application/affidavit for
condonation of delay; the same is scanned and re-produced for an
immediate reference:
Page 2 of 6
Haseena Begum ITA No. 927/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12
The averments made by assessee in above affidavit/application, which
are self-explanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed and
the Ld. DR for revenue does not have any objection if the bench condones
delay and accordingly left it to the wisdom of bench. We have considered the
explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or
material on record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for
delay in filing present appeal. We find that section 253(5) of the Act
empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if
there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time.
It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land
Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387
that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed
to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting
a justice-oriented approach. Thus, taking into account the facts of case, the
provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we
take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with
hearing.
The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the
assessee-individual filed return of income of AY 2011-12 declaring a total
income of Rs. 1,57,600/- which was assessed. Subsequently, on the basis of
information available in AIR revealing that the assessee deposited cash of Rs.
11,50,000/- in a/c with Central Bank of India, the AO issued notice dated
28.03.2018 to re-open case of assessee u/s 147. However, the assessee
Page 3 of 6
Haseena Begum ITA No. 927/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12
remained non-compliant. The AO thereafter issued multiple notices u/s
142(1) but still the assessee remained non-compliant. Finally, the AO issued
a show-cause notice u/s 144 and made service through speed-post and
inspector of department but still the assessee remained non-complaint.
Ultimately, the AO completed assessment u/s 144 after making an addition
of Rs. 11,50,000/- on account of unexplained deposit in bank a/c.
Aggrieved, the assessee caried matter in first-appeal but could not represent,
therefore the CIT(A) did not grant any relief. Still aggrieved, the assessee has
come in next appeal before us.
Ld. AR made a straightforward submission that the assessee, being a
lady and not aware of tax proceedings, could not participate before AO
during assessment-proceeding, which led the AO to make ex-parte
assessment u/s 144. During first appellate proceeding also, the assessee
sought adjournments on two occasions but, however, could not make
representation before CIT(A), which led the CIT(A) to pass ex-parte order
approving AO’s order. He submitted that the AO has made addition of Rs.
11,50,000/- on account of unexplained deposit in bank a/c but the
assessee has collected required evidences to explain the source of deposits.
He prayed that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity be given to
assessee by way of restoring this matter at the level of Ld. AO for a de novo
adjudication. He acknowledged that the assessee shall definitely make a
proper and effective representation before Ld. AO.
Page 4 of 6
Haseena Begum ITA No. 927/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12
The Ld. DR for revenue, though not opposing the prayer of the
assessee for restoration, submitted that the assessee had remained non-
compliant before both of the lower-authorities despite ample opportunities
given. He pointed out that the AO served notices upon assessee through
speed post as well as inspector service. It was, therefore, submitted that
while restoring the matter, appropriate directions may be issued to ensure
strict compliance by the assessee including imposition of suitable cost.
In view of above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle
of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be
caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of Ld. AO, we
remand this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for adjudication afresh, at the
risk and responsibility of assessee. The Ld. AO shall give necessary
opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order
uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain
vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by Ld. AO
without seeking unnecessary adjournments failing which the Ld. AO shall
be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.
However, we find that the assessee has remained non-responsive
before AO despite service of notices through speed post and inspector
of department. Further, the assessee has also remained non-
participative despite adjournments granted by CIT(A). Therefore, in
order to offset the revenue’s efforts in dealing assessee’s case, we
impose a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid by assessee to Income-tax
Page 5 of 6
Haseena Begum ITA No. 927/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12
Department through appropriate challan. The assessee shall submit a
copy of duly paid challan to AO during the proceeding of fresh
adjudication and shall not claim any credit or refund of such payment.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose, subject
to payment of cost by assessee as mentioned above.
Order pronounced in open court on 17/04/2026
Sd/- Sd/-
(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Indore
िदनांक/Dated : 17/04/2026
Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 6 of 6