IKRAM UDDIN,BHOPAL vs. ITO,4(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Per Paresh M. Joshi, JM:

This is an Appeal filed by the Assessee under section 253 of

the Income Tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act

for sake of brevity] before this tribunal as and by way of a

second appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order

bearing no: - ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1076542839(1)

dated 29.05.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT (A) u/s 250 of the

Page 1 of 12

Act, which is herein after referred to as the “Impugned

order”. The Relevant Assessment year is 2017-18 and the

corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2016 to

31.03.2017.

That as and by way of the Assessment Order made u/s 144

of the Act, the total Income of the Assessee was computed

and assessed at Rs.5,98,400/- ROI was not filed. The

addition of Rs.2,98,400/- was made as the Income from the

business or Profession by virtue of Para 6 of the aforesaid

order. Yet another addition of Rs.3,00,000/- was made as

unexplained cash credit by virtue of Para 7 of the aforesaid

order. That the aforesaid Assessment order bears Number:-

ITBA/AST/S/144/2019-20/1018488079(1) and that the

same us dated 30/09/2019 which is hereinafter referred to

as the “Impugned Assessment Order”.

2.2 That the Assessee in response to the Notice u/s 142(1)

dated 13/02/2018 was called upon to furnish ROI on or

Page 2 of 12

before 15/03/2018 but the Assessee failed to do so. The

Assessee had also failed to file ITR u/s 139 on or before

31/03/2018.

2.3 The Dept of Income Tax basis “Operation Clean Money”

had gathered a list of assessee who had deposited

substantial cash in the bank account(s) during

the demonetization period from 9th Nov 2016 to 30th Dec

2016 but had not filed ITR for Assessment Year 2017-

2018. The said data revealed that the Assessee Shri Ikram

Uddin had deposited by cash sum of Rs. 17,85,000/- in his

bank account during the period of Demonetization the

details of which are as under:-

2.4 That “In view of the provisions of Section 144(1)(a) of the

Act, and for the failure on the part of the assessee to furnish

Page 3 of 12

the Income Tax Return for AY 2017-18 in response to notice

u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 13.02.2018, the Assessing Officer

is proceeded with completion of ‘best judgment assessment’

through manual proceedings. During the course of

assessment proceedings, notice u/s 142(1) of Act was issued

on 07.06.2019 and served upon the assessee by speed post

as well as through Notice Server. Thereafter, a show cause

notice u/s 144 is also issued on 18.06.2019. Due to change

in incumbency, another notice u/s 129 was also issued on

06.08.2019.

2.5 That In compliance to the notice, Shri Mohd. Asif,

Advocate and AR of the assessee attended the hearings from

time-to-time, furnished written submission along with cash-

book, sale & purchase bills, bank statement, ledger accounts

of the parties from whom the assessee have made purchases

and copy of VAT tax returns are placed on record.

2.6 That in Para 6 of the Impugned Assessment Order the Ld

Assessing Officer has held as under:- 2.7 That the Assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid

“Impugned Assessment Order” prefers the first Appeal

u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld CIT(A) who by the

“Impugned Order” has dismissed the first appeal of the

Assessee on the grounds and the reasons stated therein. The

core grounds and the reasons for the dismissal of the first

appeal were as under:-

6.1 Ground of appeal no. 1- in view of the above discussion

(Para 5.1.1.), ground of appeal is dismissed.

6.2 Ground of appeal no. 2 & 3-not adjudicated.

6.3 Ground of appeal no. 4-not adjudicated.

6.4 Ground of appeal no. 5- dismissed.

2.8 That the Assessee being aggrieved by the “Impugned

Order” has preferred the Instant Second Appeal before this

Page 7 of 12

Tribunal and has raised the following grounds of Appeal in

the form No:- 36 against the “Impugned Order” which are

as under:-

appeal of the appellant, without deciding the appeal on

merits, and that a fair and meaningful opportunity was not

available to the appellant to present his case.

without considering the facts and circumstances of the Case.

3.The ld CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of

Rs. 2,98,400/- on account of income from business OR

profession without considering the facts and circumstances

of the case.

of Rs. 3,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credit

without considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

of the grounds of appeal.

3 Record of Hearing

Page 8 of 12

3.1 That the hearing in the matter took place before this

tribunal on 06/07/2026 when the Ld AR and on the behalf

of the Assessee appeared before us and Interalia contended

that the “Impugned Order” is bad in law, illegal and not

proper. It is passed in the violation of the principles of

Natural Justice. It therefore deserves to be set aside. It was

next contended that the Registry has pointed out the delay of

211 days in filling the Instant Second Appeal. An Affidavit dt

03/07/2026 is placed on record wherein it is stated that

Assessee is illiterate and belongs to weaker section of the

society. He is a local vendor on streets. That in Feb 2026

he received a call from the Dept of Income Tax when he came

to know about the Demand of Tax. Thereafter he contacted

the Tax consultant who later filed the Instant Appeal. Hence

delay be condoned. The Ld DR appearing for and on the

behalf of the Dept. contended that he leaves the issue on

condation to the wisdom of this tribunal. After hearing both

the parties we condone the delay as “sufficient cause” is

shown. Delay condoned and Appeal is admitted for hearing.

The Ld AR then Interalia contended that both the orders of

Page 9 of 12

the lower authorities in sum and substance are exparte in

nature and that case deserves to be remanded back to the

lower authorities. Per Contra Ld DR appearing for and on the

behalf of the Revenue contended that he leaves the issue to

the wisdom of this Tribunal to take appropriate care in this

regard. The Hearing was over and closed.

4 Observations, Finding and Conclusions

4.1 We have to decide the legality, validity and proprietary of the

“Impugned order” basis records of the case & the rival

submission canvassed before us.

4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case and have

heard the submissions.

4.3 We basis records of the case and after hearing and further

upon examining the rival contentions of the Ld AR and the Ld DR

canvasses before us, are of the considered opinion that the

“Impugned Assessment Order” is under Section 144 of the

Act. Even the “Impugned Order” is not on Merits. This

Tribunal desires that the total Income of the Assessee should be

computed and Assessed on the real time basis exigible to Tax in

Page 10 of 12

accordance with law by following the due process of law under

the Act. This Tribunal also expects the Assessee to be compliant

and should cooperate with the Dept as and when the Notice(s) etc

are issued. In brief this Tribunal desires the meritorious disposal

of both the “Impugned Assessment Order” as well as the

“Impugned Order”. The Assessee cooperation in this regard

assumes importance. The Assessee cannot go in slumber mode.

In the result we are considered opinion that the “Impugned

Order” should be set aside and that the matter should be

remanded back to the file of LD Assessing Officer for passing a

fresh order on the merits of the case. It is the expectation of this

Tribunal that the Assessee would give his full and complete

details including latest emails of his and of his counsel where the

Notice(s) etc could be served effectively by the Dept. the Assessee

to attend hearings as and when fixed and to file reply and details

as sought by the Ld Assessing Officer.

4.4 In view of the above, we set aside the “Impugned Order” and

remand the case back to the file of Ld Assessing Officer on

denovo basis who shall now pass a speaking and well-reasoned

Page 11 of 12

order after taking into consideration the defense set up by the

Assessee in the form of reply, submissions, evidences, material

etc.

5.1 In the Result the Impugned Order is set aside as and by

way and remand back to the file of Ld Assessing Officer.

5.2 The appeal of the Assessee is allowed for Statistical

Purpose.

Pronounced in open court on 09.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (PARESH M. JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Indore िदनांक /Dated : 09/07/2026

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 12 of 12