ANURADHA PALWAI,WARANGAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL

At the outset, there is a delay of 103 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition explaining the reasons for the delay. The learned counsel for the assessee Shri M. Poorna Chander Rao, C.A. referring to the petition filed by the assessee, submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was neither deliberate nor intentional but occurred due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee and that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A), dated 09.12.2025, pertains to A.Y. 2017-18.

The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that, the assessee is a woman and has no regular source of taxable income. However, she earns agricultural income from her 5 acres of agricultural land. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that, the assessee had never been assessed to income tax in the

The learned Sr. A.R. for the Revenue, Shri R. Kumaran, on the other hand, opposed the condonation petition filed by the assessee. She submitted that the assessee has failed to file the appeal within the prescribed period and, therefore, the delay may not be condoned. However, she fairly submitted that the issue may be decided in accordance with law on the basis of the facts and material available on record.

We have heard both the parties, perused the petition filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay of 103 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. We find that, the reasons explained by the assessee appear to be genuine and bona fide and come under 'sufficient cause'. We further find that, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji, reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC), has laid down certain principles for condoning the delay and directed that a lenient approach should be followed to avoid dismissal of meritorious cases on technical grounds. Going by the principles laid down in Mst. Katiji (supra), and also considering the submissions of the assessee, we condone

The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and has not filed her return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18. On the basis of information available under ‘Operation Clean Money’, the A.O. noticed that, the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 9,60,000/- in her bank account during the demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. Accordingly, notice u/s 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was issued on 15.02.2018 requiring the assessee to furnish the return of income. As there was no proper compliance, further notices u/s 142(1) dated 20.09.2019 and 01.11.2019 and a show cause notice dated 12.11.2019 were issued. The assessee failed to properly comply with the notices and, therefore, the A.O. proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Act.

During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. obtained information from the bank u/s 133(6) of the Act and noticed total credits of Rs. 29,58,326/- in the assessee’s bank account, including cash deposits of Rs. 9,60,000/- during the demonetization period and other credits of Rs. 19,98,326/-. The assessee subsequently submitted that the cash deposits were sourced from past savings and sale proceeds of open plots and that the other credits were received through RTGS/NEFT/cheque transfers. However, the A.O. held that the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain the sources of the bank credits with supporting evidence and treated Rs. 29,58,326/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act, taxable u/s 115BBE. The A.O. also treated the agricultural income of Rs. 5,00,000/- declared by the assessee as income from other sources for want of supporting evidence. Accordingly, the total income was assessed at Rs. 34,58,326/-.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 34,58,326/- made by the A.O., contending that proper opportunity was not provided to explain

Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal.

The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri M. Poorna Chander Rao, C.A., submitted that the A.O. completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and made addition of Rs. 29,58,326/- u/s 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of credits in the assessee’s bank account. The learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that, the assessee could not effectively represent her case before the authorities below and, therefore, the necessary evidences could not be furnished. He further submitted that the assessee is now in a

The learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue, Shri R. Kumaran, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below. However, he fairly submitted that, the issue may be decided in accordance with law on the basis of the facts and material available on record.

We have heard both parties, perused the material available on record and had gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the A.O. completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and made addition of Rs.29,58,326/- u/s 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of the credits in the assessee’s bank account. We further find that, the Ld. CIT(A), after considering the material available on record, confirmed the addition made by the A.O. It is the contention of the assessee that she could not effectively represent her case before the authorities below and furnish the necessary documentary evidences in support of her claim. The

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that, the assessment was completed by the A.O. ex parte and the assessee could not effectively represent her case before the authorities below. In our considered view, if the assessee is now in a position to produce all the relevant evidences, one more opportunity deserves to be granted in the interest of substantial justice so that the issue involved in the appeal can be adjudicated on the basis of complete facts and evidences. Therefore, we deem it fit to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the A.O. with a direction to reconsider the issue involved in the appeal de novo after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after considering all the evidences that may be filed in support of her claim. Needless to say, the assessee is also directed to cooperate with the assessment proceedings and furnish all necessary details and documentary evidences without seeking unnecessary adjournments. We order accordingly.

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