RAJPUT SAMAJ SHERGARH BALESAR PARGANA DHARAMSHALA TRUST,JODHPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

At the outset, it is noticed that the Registry has pointed out a delay of 301 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the circumstances resulting in the delay.

The ld. AR submitted that the reasons for the delay are the same as those stated in the affidavit placed on record in ITA No. 532/JODH/2024. Referring thereto, he submitted that the President of the assessee-trust was, during the relevant period, away in connection with the construction work of the Dharamshala at Haridwar. It was further submitted that the authorised representative looking after the income-tax matters was suffering from health-related problems and subsequently suffered a brain stroke. On account of these circumstances, communication with the authorised representative could not be maintained and the assessee remained unaware of the orders passed by the Income Tax Department. It was submitted that upon subsequently becoming aware of the outstanding demand and the orders passed against the assessee, necessary steps were taken and the present appeal

The ld. DR raised no objection to the condonation of delay.

We have considered the explanation furnished by the assessee. The circumstances stated in the affidavit explain the reasons which prevented the assessee from pursuing the appellate remedy within the prescribed period. Nothing has been brought before us to suggest that the delay was deliberate or that the assessee stood to derive any advantage by filing the appeal belatedly. We also take note of the fact that the ld. DR has raised no objection to the prayer for condonation. Considering the totality of the circumstances, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed period. Accordingly, the delay of 301 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO issued notices under section 142(1) from time to time requiring the assessee to furnish the requisite details and documents. The assessment order records that notices dated 27.08.2019, 13.10.2019, 04.11.2019 and 16.11.2019, fixing hearings on 03.09.2019, 18.10.2019, 08.11.2019 and

In the absence of compliance, the AO proceeded to frame the assessment to the best of his judgment under section 144 of the Act. From the bank statement obtained by issuing notice under section 133(6), the AO noticed cash deposits aggregating to Rs. 70,27,100/- during F.Y. 2016-17, including cash deposited during the demonetisation period. Since, according to the AO, no explanation or supporting evidence regarding the nature and source of such cash deposits had been furnished, the entire amount of Rs. 70,27,100/- was treated as unexplained money and added under section 69A of the Act.

The AO further noticed interest income of Rs. 35,919/-, which was brought to tax as income from other sources. The assessee had also disclosed voluntary contribution forming part of corpus amounting to Rs. 72,48,100/-. After taking into consideration the amount already subjected to addition under section 69A, the balance amount of Rs.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 31.12.2019. The impugned order records that notice was initially issued on 24.12.2020, followed by further notices including notices dated 18.05.2023, 30.05.2023, 05.06.2023 and 16.06.2023. However, no written submissions or supporting documents were furnished by the assessee.

In the absence of compliance, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dispose of the appeal on the basis of the material available on record. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the core issue related to the taxability of the cash deposits made in the bank account and that the assessee had not furnished any explanation or relevant documents in support of the grounds raised. The ld. CIT(A), therefore, declined to interfere with the assessment order and dismissed the appeal vide order dated 26.06.2023.

On merits, the ld. AR submitted that the assessment order as well as the first appellate order have been passed ex parte without the

The ld. AR submitted that if one effective opportunity is granted, the assessee would furnish the requisite details and documentary evidence before the AO and would duly cooperate in the proceedings. He, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the entire matter be restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The undisputed position emerging from the orders of the authorities below is that the assessment was framed under section 144 of the Act on account of non-compliance by the assessee. The AO, therefore, did not have the benefit of examining the assessee's explanation, books of account and supporting documents while making

Thus, both stages of the proceedings have effectively remained ex parte insofar as the assessee's explanation and supporting evidence on the merits of the additions are concerned. The principal addition is of Rs. 70,27,100/- under section 69A of the Act, representing cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The assessee contends in its grounds of appeal that the deposits represented receipts of the trust. Apart therefrom, the additions of Rs. 2,21,000/- in respect of voluntary contribution and Rs. 35,919/- towards interest income are also under challenge. These issues, in our considered view, ought appropriately to be examined after affording the assessee an effective opportunity to furnish its explanation and the relevant documentary evidence.

We are conscious of the fact that several opportunities were granted by the AO as well as by the ld. CIT(A) and that the assessee did not avail itself of those opportunities. At the same time, the circumstances resulting in such non-compliance have now been explained through the affidavit placed before us. The ld. AR has also

Considering the entirety of the facts and circumstances, and with a view to providing one effective opportunity for adjudication of the substantive issues on the basis of the relevant material, we deem it just and proper to set aside the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the entire matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication.

Accordingly, the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside and all the grounds and issues raised by the assessee are restored to the file of the AO. The assessee shall be at liberty to furnish its books of account, bank statements, details relating to the cash deposits, details and evidence relating to voluntary contributions, trust records and such other material as may be relevant to substantiate its case. The AO shall consider the explanation and evidence so furnished and decide the issues afresh, on their own merits and in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Since the matter is being restored for fresh adjudication, we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of any of the additions or the

Before parting, we make it clear that the restoration is being granted as an opportunity to enable adjudication of the issues on merits. The assessee is, therefore, directed to extend full cooperation before the AO, comply with the notices issued and furnish the requisite details and evidence within the time allowed. The AO shall thereafter pass a speaking order in accordance with law.

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