SMT KANTA LALWANI,BHOPAL vs. CIT-APPEAL, 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 the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of an

Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing

Number:-ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1081772319(1) dated

15.10.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred as the “impugned order”. The

relevant assessment is 2011-12 and the corresponding

previous year period is from 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2011.

2.1 That as and by way of an assessment order made u/s

144 r.w.s 147 of the Act, the total income of the assessee

was computed and assessed at Rs.10,56,000/-. The

assessee was a non-filer. That the aforesaid assessment

order is dated 28.03.2016 which was passed by ITO (1)(3),

Bhopal which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned

Assessment Order.”

2.2 That the assessee along with her husband on

19.04.2010 had purchased an immovable property for

Rs.21,12,000/-. It was a joint property. The share of the

assessee was taken as Rs.10,56,000/-[Rs.21,12,000/2].

The assessee was given more than sufficient opportunities as

& by way of notice(s) u/s 148,142(1), etc. from 27.03.2015

to 03.03.2016 as detailed by a chart in the “Impugned Assessment Order” to furnish the necessary information

material & the documents, but the assessee failed to do so.

The assessee also failed to give any explanation with regard

to source of Rs.10,56,000/- u/s 69 of the Act despite

opportunities. Under these facts & the circumstances the

Ld. AO passed the “Impugned Assessment Order”

quantifying Rs.10,56,000/- as total income of the assessee

exigible to Tax.

2.3 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 & the reasons for the dismissal of the first

appeal was as under:-

Observation and decision:- “The appeal was filed by the appellant against the order u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the IT Act, 1961 passed by the ITO, Ward 1(3), Bhopal dated 28.03.2016.

In connection with the appeal, opportunities were provided to the appellant to substantiate her grounds of appeal on the following dates:

Sr. No. Date of hearing(s)

1 05.01.2023

2 28.04.2023

3 19.05.2023

4 10.02.2025

5 20.03.2025

Despite the issuance of the 5 notices as mentioned above, there was no response from the appellant. It shall be noted that the appeal was filed more than 9 years ago and no response has been received from the appellant. It is therefore, evident that the appellant is not interested in providing any details during the appellate proceedings and avail the opportunity under the principle of natural Justice. In such a situation, the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal.”

“This appeal has been filed by the appellant stating that the AO is not justified to make addition on investment made by the appellant's husband by his own fund and that the addition made by the AO is unwarranted.” “In such a situation, it is for the appellant to furnish submissions with relevant evidence(s), case laws, if any, to support the claim. The 'burden of proof is always on the person who makes the claim. In this case, it is the appellant who has made the claim by filing the appeal. Thus, in cases where a particular receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the initial onus is on the Assessing Officer to prove that it is taxable. Where, however, the assessee claims exemption, the burden is on the assessee to prove it to be exempt. Same is the position in case of all allowances, deductions, claims or loss, etc. Since an appeal is nothing but the claim of the appellant that he has been unduly unjustifiably taxed, it is for the appellant to prove his case. The appellant has not availed any opportunity to do so.” “From the conduct of the appellant as per the facts noted above, it is clear that the appellant does not wish to pursue the appeal. Even otherwise on the merits of the case also, I do not see any reason to differ with the findings of the AO, since no attempt has been made by the appellant to discharge her onus. Hence, respectfully following the above-mentioned judicial pronouncements and in view of the facts of the case, the appeal is hereby dismissed.” “In the end result, the appeal is DISMISSED.”

2.4 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “Impugned

Order” has preferred the instant appeal before this Tribunal

& has raised the following grounds of appeal in the form No.

36 against the “Impugned Order” which are as under:-

“1. (a): Your Honour, Separate sheet of ground of appeal in brief enclose with form. That the Ld. CIT(Appeal) erred in sustaining tax, interest and penalty demand of Rs. 3,73,321/-despite determine assessed income at nill, which is illegal orbitery and liable to be deleted. (b): - That merely purchase of property in joint name does not justified addition in the hands of the appellant in absence of proof of investment. 2.(a): - That when the substantive addition itself is unsustainable, the consequential levi of tax, interest and penalty cannot survive and deserves deleted in full.

(b): - The order pass by learned AO without granting effective opportunity, despite medical hardship of her husband. C: - Violation of natural justice, order pass by learned AO is totally harrasable to appellant. 3. (a): - Penalty and interest, that initiation of the penalty u/s 271(1) (c) and levy of interest u/s 234A/B/C is illegal and unjustified, being consequential. (b): - General, the appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend grounds at the time of hearing.”

3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this

Tribunal on 24.06.2026 when the Ld. AR for & on behalf of

the Assessee appeared before us & interalia contended that

the “Impugned Order” is bad in law, illegal & not Proper. It

is also in the violation of the principles of natural justice. It

therefore deserves to be set aside. The Ld. AR has placed on

the record of this Tribunal a written submission consisting

of 5 pages on 20.06.2026 for hearing on 24.06.2026. A

compilation of medical records, registered sale deed for

Rs.21,12,000/- dated 22.01.2010, Bank statements [All

document are filed loosly without pagination &

certification]. The Ld. AR then pleaded that due to poor health condition of Rajesh Lalwani the husband of the

assessee & due to certain other factors beyond control the

assessee has remained non-participative before the lower

authorities & impugned orders came to be passed in an

exparte manner. It was prayed that the impugned order be

set aside & the matter be remanded back to the Ld.AO on

denovo basis where the assessee undertakes to appear & file

all the necessary papers & documents which are sought. Per

contra the Ld. DR appearing for revenue left the issue to this

tribunal to take appropriate call in this regard. Hearing was

then over & concluded.

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 & after hearing & further

upon examining the rival contentions of the Ld. AR & the Ld.

DR canvassed before us, are of the considered opinion that

the “Impugned Assessment Order” is under section 144 of

the Act & that the matter has not been adjudicated and

adjudged basis merits. Even the “Impugned Order” is not

on the merits. This tribunal desires that the total income of

the assessee should be computed & assessed on the real

time basis exigible to tax in according 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 department as & 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 of the considered opinion that the

“Impugned Order” should be set aside & that the matter

should be remanded back to the file of the Ld. AO 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 &

complete details including latest e-mail of her & of her counsel where the notice(s) etc. could be served effectively by

the department. The assessee to attend the hearing as &

when fixed before the Ld. AO & to file reply & details as

sought by the Ld. AO.

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

& remand the case back to file of the Ld. AO on denovo

basis, who shall now pass a speaking & well-reasoned order

on merits of the case.

5 Order

5.1 In the result- the “Impugned Order” is set aside as & by

way of remand back to the file of the Ld. AO.

5.2. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced by putting on notice board as per Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 06/7/2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

(DR. MANISH BORAD) (PARESH M. JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Indore

िदनांक /Dated : 06/07/2026 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