PRATIBHA VAIDYA,BHOPAL vs. ITO 5(2), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:

This is an Appeal filed by the Assessee Under Section 253 of the

Income tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before

this tribunal as and by way of a second Appeal. The Assessee is

Aggrieved by the Order bearing No.:- ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-

25/1071687503(1) dated 30-12-2024 Passed by the Ld CIT(A)

u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred to as the

“Impugned Order”. The Relevant Assessment Year is 2011-2012 and the Corresponding Previous Year Period is from 01-04-2010

to 31-03-2011.

(2.1) That as & by way of an Assessment Order made u/s 144

of the Act, the total Income of the Assessee was Computed &

Assessed at Rs 37,29,525/- u/s 69A of the Act. Return of

Income was not filed u/s 148. Regular Return of Income was

too not filed. The aforesaid Assessment Order is dated 11-12-

2018 which is herein after referred to as the “Impugned

Assessment Order”.

(2.2) That as per the AIR information generated through the

“system” it was found that during the FY 2010-11 the Assessee

had made Cash Deposits to the extent of Rs. 37,29,525/- in her

savings bank Accounts. The source of cash deposit was found to

be not verifiable as the Assessee had not filed her ITR for the

Relevant period. A notice dated 28-03-2018 was issued & served.

The Querry letters dated 21-07-2016 & 12-02-2018 were not

compiled with. Notice(s) u/s 142(1) dated 08-06-2018 was

issued through speed post along with a questionnaire which was not compiled with. A reminder was issued on 16-10-2018. No

response was received from the Assessee. No submissions

were filed. A notice u/s 144 of the Act was issued on 12-11-

2018 through Speed Post fixing case for 21-11-2018. Nobody

appeared on 21-11-2018. The Ld AO in the “Impugned

Assessment Order” treated cash deposit of Rs 10,65,525/- in

the ICICI Bank Account & Rs. 26,64,000/- in SBI Account

aggregating to Rs. 37,29,525/- as Unexplained Cash u/s 69A

of the Act. Notice(s) u/s 133(6) of the Act were compiled with

by the aforesaid bankers.

(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 & Reasons stated therein. The core grounds & Reasons

stated therein. The Core grounds & Reasons for the Dismissal of

the first Appeal was as under:-

“7. Decision: During the course of appeal proceedings, the appeal was posted for on various dates, the details of which are as follows:

S.No. Date of notice Date of Remarks hearing 1 22.01.2021 08.02.2021 No response

2 19.08.2021 24.08.2021 No response

3 06.12.2024 13.12.2024 No response

There was no response from the appellant to the above notices of hearing and also no application for adjournment or written submissions were submitted till the date of disposal of this appeal. Hence, it has been decided to discuss the subject matter of appeal on the material available on record.

"appeal does not mean only filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively. In cases where the assessee does not want to pursue the appeal, the Court/Tribunal have inherent power to dismiss the appeal..."

An appeal means an effective appeal- "expression "prefer an appeal" would mean effectively prosecuting an appeal" Purposefully interpreted, preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursuing it. If a party retreats before the contest begins, it is as good as not having entered the fray. 9. The issues were considered. Relevant assessment order, statement of facts and grounds of appeal were carefully perused. It is seen from the Assessment Order that the Assessing Officer has made an addition to the total income amounting to Rs. 37,29,625-00 the ground of unexplained cash deposit in the Bank account of ICICI amounting to Re. 10,65,525/- and bank account of SBI amounting to Rs. 24,64,000/- during the period under consideration. After due consideration of all the facts available on record, the appellent's grounds are found to be untenable due to the fact that specific findings in the assessment order have not been controverted by the appellant along with corroborative evidences. The arguments advanced by the appellant in his statement of facts and grounds of appeal are also not supported by tangible materials. Accordingly, the appeal is being decided keeping in view the facts brought on record by the AO in the assessment order and by the appellant in the grounds of appeal, statement of facts. 9.1 The appellant's contentions are not acceptable in the absence of written submission to substantiate its contentions made in the grounds of appeal and non submission of any material in the course of the appellate proceedings to controvert the findings in the assessment order by the AO to arrive at his decision on the issues. 9.2 Based on the facts mentioned above, and detailed discussion in the assessment order by the AO, I am not inclined to interfere with the decision of the AO on the issues raised in the grounds of appeal. 9.3 In view of the above, I do not find any infirmity in the decision of the AO and am not inclined to interfere with the decision of the AO, Hence, ground nos 1 to 6 are found to be not maintainable, Accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed. 9.4 Ground no. 5 is related to charging of interest u/s 224, Which which is consequential and mandatory as per the provisions of Incorne Tax Act, 1961 and ground nos. 7 & 8 are general in nature and therefore they do not require any adjudication. 10. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.” (2.4) The Assessee being Aggrieved by the “Impugned Order” has

preferred the Instant Second 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. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred in confirming the addition of 737,29,525/- made by the Learned Assessing Officer merely on the basis of cash deposits reflected in the bank statement of the appellant, without appreciating the explanation and evidence available in support of the source of such deposits., 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the appellant was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause from effectively representing her case before the authorities below. It is, therefore, prayed that one final and proper opportunity may kindly be granted to the appellant to submit her reply and supporting documents, which would satisfactorily establish the source of the impugned cash deposits.”

3.1 The hearing in the Matter took place before this tribunal on

16-04-2026 when the Ld AR for & on the behalf of the Assessee

appeared before us & Interalia Contended that the “Impugned

Order” is bad in law, illegal & not proper. It is in the violation of

the Principles of Natural Justice. It therefore deserves to be set

aside. It was next contended that the Registry has pointed out

the delay of 159 days in filling the Instant Second Appeal. It was

submitted that the “Impugned Order” is dated 30-12-2024 &

the Instant appeal ought within 60 days time limit as Prescribed by the law. In the Instant Case Appeal was filed on 07-08-2025. A

condonation of the delay application is placed on the record along

with affidavit dated 16-04-2026 . With regard to the delay it was

submitted that there is a matrimonial issue & the issue of ill

health of Parents. Reliance was placed on Para 4 of the

condonation application which reads as under:-

“4. It is most respectfully submitted that during the relevant period, the Appellant was confronted with exceptional and unforeseen personal adversities, including the responsibility of attending to the grave health conditions of the assessee's parents, being entangled in protracted matrimonial litigation, and simultaneously discharging the sole duty of raising a young child as a single parent. These cumulative circumstances significantly impeded the Appellant's ability so effectively liaise with legal and tax advisors, despite best intentions and efforts.”

Ld DR appearing for the Revenue however has left the issue of

the delay to be decided by this Tribunal basis it’s wisdom. We

after going through the condonation delay application along with

affidavit & further after hearing both the parties, are of the

“Sufficient Cause” considered view that is shown for

condonation of delay. Accordingly we Condone the delay. Appeal

is admitted & taken up for the hearing.

3.2 The Ld AR then stated that an amount of Rs 37,25,525/-

have been treated as Unexplained u/s 69A of the Act. In this

regard it was submitted that the Assessee has two bank

accounts & amounts added are nothing but gifts received by

her from her Mother & Paternal Uncle. A Paper book from pages

1 to 33 is placed on the record. Our attention was invited to

P.B Page 26. Basis Page 26 which was account statement of

Mr Sadashiv Satish Vaidya (NRI) who had given gifts of Rs 23

lakhs (Paternal Uncle), the necessary correlation in this

regard can be done by Ld AO. The remainder amount of Money

came from her mother as gifts plus redeposit of amount

withdrawn by her for her A/c only. With regard to Non

representation before the lower authorities it was submitted that

it was due to critical challenges in life which is already

narrated in condonation & Affidavit.

Ld DR appearing for the revenue submitted that the orders

of both the lower authorities are exparte & it would be in the

fitness of things that the matter be remanded back to Ld AO on

denovo basis. Hearing was then concluded & closed.

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 & 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 144/147 of the Act

and the matter has not been adjudicated & adjudged basis

merits. Even the “Impugned Order” is not on Merits. This

tribunal desires that the total Income of the Assessee should be

computed & assessed on the real time basis, Exigible to tax, in

accordance with law by following due process of law under

the act. This tribunal also expects the assessee to be compliant

& should cooperate with the department as & when notice(s) etc

are issued. In brief this Tribunal desires 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 join slumber mode. In

the result we are of the considered view that the “Impugned

Order” should be set aside & 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 her full & complete details including latest

mail of her & her counsel where the notices could be served

effectively by the department. The Assessee to attend hearings as

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

4.4 In view of the premises drawn up by us, we set aside the

“Impugned Order” & remand the case back to the file of ld AO

on denovo basis who shall now pass a speaking & were reasoned

order.

5 Order

5.1 In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

way of remand back to the file of the Ld. AO on De novo basis

with direction as aforesaid.

5.2 The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

purpose.

Pronounced in open court on 27.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/-

(BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Indore Dated : 27/04/2026 Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 11 of 11