VIKAR AHMED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD, 6-2, JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 442/JPR/2014Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 August 2026AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) did not decide the appeal on merits and that the assessee was negligent in appearing. However, to provide one last opportunity, the impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed agricultural income and had bank deposits. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 2,13,000/- under Section 69B based on peak deposits. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR (PHYSICAL HEARING) BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No: 442/JPR/2014 Assessment Year: 2008-09

Shri Vikar Ahmed ITO, F-09, Rampath, Shyam Nagar, Ward 6(2), Vs New Sanganer Road, Jaipur Jaipur PAN: AAYPA6063B (Respondent) (Appellant)

Assessee Represented: Mrs. Suhani Meharwal, CA (Thr. VC) Revenue Represented: Ms. Aarti Rawat, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 17-08-2026 Date of pronouncement : 25-08-2026 ORDER PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

Appellant, Vikar Ahmed by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order (dated 26.03.2014) passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bikaner [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] on the grounds interalia that :- “1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT (Appeals) has erred in dismissing the appeal without properly appreciating the facts of the case.

I.T.A No. 442/JPR/2014 Page No 2 Vikar Ahmed

2.

Under the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT (Appeal) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,13,000/- made by applying provisions of section 69B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The assessee craves his right to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.

2.

Briefly stated, facts necessary for adjudication of the issues at hand are: During the year under consideration, the assessee was deriving income from salary, interest income on bank deposit, dividend income and has also claimed agriculture income of Rs. 20,000/-. The Assessing Officer after working out consolidated peak deposits in both the bank accounts of assessee i.e. SBBJ, Jaipur and SBBJ, Bijolia worked out the peak deposit at Rs. 2,13,000/- u/s 69B of the Act and thereby framed the assessment at Rs. 3,84,960/-.

3.

Assessee carried the matter before ld. CIT(A) by filing appeal, who has dismissed the same ex-parte on failure of the assessee to appear before him despite numerous notices issued to them. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeal.

I.T.A No. 442/JPR/2014 Page No 3 Vikar Ahmed

4.

We have heard ld. AR of the assessee, ld. DR of the revenue and perused the documents available on record.

5.

Bare perusal of impugned order passed by ld. CIT(A) goes to show that four notices are shown to have been issued by ld. CIT(A) but Appellant did not appear. At the same time, it is noticed that the appeal has not been decided on merits by the ld. CIT(A).

6.

No doubt, assessee remained negligent in appearing before ld. CIT(A) despite service but how his counsel has assured that assessee will appear before ld. CIT(A) and as such one opportunity may be given to the assessee to appear before First Appellate Authority to pursue his appeal. In order to provide one last opportunity to the assessee and to further stop multiplicity of the proceedings impugned order passed by ld. CIT(A) is set aside to be decided afresh on merits, after providing reasonable opportunities of being heard to the assessee.

I.T.A No. 442/JPR/2014 Page No 4 Vikar Ahmed

7.

Resultantly, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25-08-2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Jaipur Dated:- 25/08/2026. *Ganesh Kumar, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- 2. The Respondent- 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. Guard File By order,

Asst. Registrar

More judgments on Section 69B

All 1,579 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →