BANU AMBRIN ,SHIVOMOGGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SHIVOMOGGA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1458/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 May 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal granted the assessee an opportunity to present her case before the CIT(A) on merits, considering her illiteracy and remote location. The previous ex-parte orders were set aside to allow for a fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a dealer in ginger, failed to respond to notices from the AO and CIT(A), leading to ex-parte assessments. The AO treated cash deposits as unexplained money, and the CIT(A) upheld this due to non-response.

What were the issues?

Whether cash deposits can be treated as unexplained money without providing the assessee an opportunity to explain, especially considering her circumstances. The validity of ex-parte assessment orders when the assessee claims lack of proper communication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev C. Nulvi, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Balusamy .N, JCIT-DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE

BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 1458/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16

Smt. Banu Ambrin, W/o. Laheekul Rehaman, The Income Tax Hosanagar Road, Officer, Gavatur Village, Ward – 1(TPS), Ripponpet – 577 426. Shivamogga. Vs. PAN: BIEPA2140J APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Assessee by : Shri Rajeev C. Nulvi, Advocate

Revenue by : Shri Balusamy .N, JCIT-DR

Date of Hearing : 24-02-2026 Date of Pronouncement : 11-05-2026

ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER

This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 07/05/2025 in respect of the A.Y. 2015-16.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a dealer in vegetables and mainly dealing in ginger. The assessee had filed her return of income on 29/10/2025. The AO based on the information that the assessee had made large cash transactions and cash deposits had initiated proceedings by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Thereafter, the said

Page 2 of 4 ITA No. 1458/Bang/2025

notice was treated as notice issued u/s. 148A(b) of the Act based on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and thereafter objections called for. The assessee had not responded to the said notice and thereafter notice u/s. 148 was issued for which also the assessee had not filed his return of income. Thereafter notice u/s. 142(1) was issued on various dates and the assessee had not responded to any of the notices. Therefore, a show cause notice was issued on the basis that why the cash deposits should not be treated as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. The assessee also not responded to the show cause notice and therefore the AO had made an assessment u/s. 144 of the Act and treated the cash deposits as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act.

3.

As against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). But the assessee had not responded to the hearing notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A) and therefore the Ld.CIT(A) had decided the appeal against the assessee in the absence of any evidence / documents.

4.

As against the said ex-parte order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

5.

At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee is a dealer in ginger and also got license from the department of agricultural marketing, Government of Karnataka. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee had purchased the ginger from the local farmers on credit basis and transported the same by lorry to various places in Rajasthan and New Delhi and the said traders in other states deposited the cash into the assessee’s bank account with ICICI Bank and also with the Canara Bank. Therefore, the Ld.AR submitted that all the credits in the bank accounts are nothing but the sale proceeds of ginger and therefore the said credit should not be treated as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. The Ld.AR further submitted that because of the consultant’s mistake, she was not able to respond to the notices issued by the AO and therefore the best judgment

Page 3 of 4 ITA No. 1458/Bang/2025

assessment has been made. The Ld.AR further submitted that the hearing notices were also not brought to the knowledge of the assessee and only when the message on 07/05/2025 has been received by her about the passing of the order u/s. 250, she came to know the status of the appeal and therefore the present appeal has been filed before this Tribunal challenging the said ex-parte order of the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR also submitted the copies of the bank statements and prayed that an opportunity may be granted.

6.

The Ld.DR submitted that the AO as well as the Ld.CIT(A) had made sincere efforts by issuing notices but unfortunately the assessee had not availed the said opportunities and therefore prayed to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee.

7.

We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.

8.

We have perused the bank statements filed by the assessee. From the said statement, we found that the assessee had received credits from various places. The fact that the assessee is a dealer in ginger was also not disputed by the authorities. In such circumstances, the non-response by the assessee would not be a ground to treat the credits received by the assessee as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act.

9.

Considering the fact that the assessee is an illiterate lady and also resides in a remote village, we deem it fit to grant an another opportunity to the assessee to place all the details before the Ld.CIT(A). In the event of filing all the details before the Ld.CIT(A), the Ld.CIT(A) is directed to consider the issue on merits and decide the issue in accordance with law after hearing the assessee.

Page 4 of 4 ITA No. 1458/Bang/2025

10.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 11th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) Vice President Judicial Member

Bangalore, Dated, the 11th May, 2026. /MS /

Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. Guard file 6. CIT(A) By order

Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →