JYOTI BATRA,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 5(2), NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 626/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 September 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the issues on merits to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to pass a speaking order after granting a fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 29 days. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 6,58,000/- for unexplained money under Section 69A. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-compliance without deciding on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-compliance without deciding on merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR SMC BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Umang Agrawal, CA
Hearing: 06/08/2026Pronounced: 02/09/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR "SMC" BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through virtual)

ITA No. 626/NAG/2026 (Asst. Year : 2017-18) Jyoti Batra, Plot No. ITO, Ward-5(2), Nagpur 627/B, House D-2, vs Hazari Pahad, Seminary Hills, Nagpur-440006. PAN : AWUBP 0408 P Assessee Revenue

Assessee by : Shri Umang Agrawal, CA Department by : Ms.Jaya Lakhwani, Sr.DR Date of hearing : 06/08/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 02/09/2026

O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. ADDL/JCIT (Appeals)-1, Vadodara (for short, “CIT(A)”) dated 17.02.2026 passed u/sec. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is arising out of assessment order dated 26.12.2019 passed u/sec. 143(3) of the Act by the ITO, Ward-5(2), Nagpur for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18.

2.

Registry has informed that there is a delay of 29 days in filing the present appeal. Application for condonation of delay along with an affidavit is placed on record. Perusal of the same and after hearing both the sides, I find that the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate and therefore, in the interest of justice and taking guidance from the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors [1987 (2) SCC 107] and also in the case of Inder Singh vs.

2 ITA No.626/PUN/2026 (Jyoti Batra) State of Madhya Pradesh dated 21.03.2025 [(2025) INSC 382)], I hereby condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

The sole grievance of the assessee is against the addition for unexplained money u/sec. 69A of the Act at Rs. 6,58,000/-.

4.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material placed before me. Assessee is an individual and declared income of Rs. 4,33,800/- in the return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 filed on 09.07.20217. Case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for verification of cash deposits during demonetization period. Assessee is claiming to be a distributor of two portals namely EBIX Travel Pvt. Ltd. and on money on mobile limited and she earns commission. Ld.Assessing Officer (AO) was not satisfied with the source of cash deposits and made the addition for unexplained money u/sec. 69A of the Act at Rs. 6,58,000/-. Assessee challenged the addition by way of filing appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), but thereafter could not respond to the notice of hearing issued by the Ld.CIT(A) dated 23.02.2021, 23.06.2023, 05.08.2025, 10.09.2025 & 08.01.2026 and therefore, Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-compliance without dealing with the merits of the case. Before this Tribunal, the only prayer of the assessee is to afford one more opportunity to go before the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication of issues on merits. There being no strong objection from the side of ld.DR.

5.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore all the issues on merits raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. I observed that Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) [2017] 297 CTR

3 ITA No.626/PUN/2026 (Jyoti Batra) 614 (Bom.) has held that Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits, even in an ex-parte order. Therefore, Ld.CIT(A) is directed to pass a speaking order as contemplated u/sec. 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that Ld.CIT(A) shall grant fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

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

Order pronounced on 02nd September, 2026 under Rule 34(5) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963

Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pune & Dated : 02nd Sept., 2026 vr/- Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. PCIT concerned. 4. DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Nagpur. 5. Guard File

BY ORDER //True Copy// Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →