DIPTI DAS,LUNGLEI vs. ITO, WARD 1, SICHAR, SILCHAR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI ‘DB’ BENCH AT KOLKATA [Virtual Court] Before SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 150/GTY/2026 Assessment Year(s) 2019-20 Dipti Das ITO, Ward-1, Sichar Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: GGZPD2235R Appearances: Assessee represented by : Anil Kumar Agarwal, FCA. Department represented by : Santosh Kr. Karnani, Addl. CIT. Date of concluding the hearing : 12.05.2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 04.06.2026 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2019-20 dated 13.02.2026. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: "1. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing the appeal and upholding the action of the Assessing Officer without allowing opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 2. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the ex-parte addition of Rs 10,57,000 made u/s 69A by the Assessing Officer.

“Statement of Facts Before CIT(A) 1. The appellant assessee is an Individual engaged in business in the remote town of Lunglei located in the state of Mizoram. During the relevant previous year 2018- 19, she was carrying on business under the trade name of Dipti Variety Store. She was also registered under the GST Act during the period and filed regular returns. The cash collected from the turnover was regularly deposited into her bank accounts. 2. The assessee’s case was selected for reassessment under section 147 based on certain information available with the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. As per the order dated 26.03.2023 issued under section 148A(d) of the Act, the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs 10,57,000 in her bank account with IDBI Bank in cash during FY 2018-19 and since she had failed to file return of income, income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment and therefore it was fit case to issue notice under section 148. Notice u/s 148 was issued on 27.03.2023. 3. The assessee had never filed any return of income uptil that date and was not registered on the e-portal during that period. She therefore never received any notice which might have been issued u/s 148A or u/s 148 and therefore could not respond. The assessee had filed returns for the first time on 19.06.2023 with the help of a local practitioner who provided his own contact