KULWINDER KAUR,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHANDIGARH

In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit of Rs.120.63 Lacs u/s 69A for want of any substantial representation from the assessee. During first appeal, the assessee filed written submissions and sought to explain the sources of these deposits. However, the appeal stood dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) for want of condonation of delay of 192 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The only prayer of Ld. AR is adjudication of appeal on merits which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. The Ld. AR stated that the assessee is in a position to explain the sources of impugned deposits. 3. We are of the considered opinion that since the assessee represented his case on merits, the delay could have been condoned by Ld. CIT(A). Nevertheless, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of appeal on merits without raising the issue of delay. The assessee is directed to plead and prove its case forthwith. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 17th August, 2026