MS. MITA BIMOL KRISTO MITTRA ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 23(2)(3), MUMBAI

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 26.03.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2012-13, raising following grounds: A) Principles of natural justice violated 1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [CIT(A)] erred on facts and in law in confirming the order of the AO by holding that in absence of any written subm interfere with 2) The learne prevented by the details be Maharashtra could not proc 3) Appellant p be set aside order after af being heard to Without prej B) Not adjud assessment 4) Without pre and in law in of assessmen 5) The lear Assessment reasons why any approval the order u/s 6) The learne was below ta her return of escaping asse in law. 7) Appellant p the ground re C) Addition 69A – Rs. 39 8) The learne addition mad u/s. 69A of R 9) The learned account of the Ms. M ITA mission by the appellant, he was not the decision of the AO. ed CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the ap y a reasonable and sufficient cause from efore the learned CIT(A) in as much as Co-operative Bank was closed and th cure the required details within time. prays that the order passed by the hon'bl and the CIT(A) may be directed to pass affording a reasonable and sufficient op o the appellant. judice to the above : dicating on the ground relating to Re ejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) e n not adjudicating on the ground relating nt. rned CIT(A) erred in not appreciatin Order did not contain any DIN nor me the same could not be affixed nor gave t l obtained for passing the order without . 144 r.w.s. 147 is bad in law. d AO failed to appreciate that the appell axable limits and the appellant was not f income and hence there could not be essment. Hence, the reopening of assess prays that the CIT(A) may be directed t lating to reopening of assessment. on account of alleged unexplained 9,73,291/- ed AO erred on facts and in law in co e by the AO on account of alleged unexpla Rs. 39,73.291/-. d CIT(A) failed to appreciate that all the c e appellant was not income and that the Mita Bimol Kristo Mittra 2 A No. 3536/MUM/2025 t inclined to ppellant was m furnishing Punjab and he appellant e CIT(A) may s a speaking pportunity of eopening of erred on facts to reopening ng that the entioned the the details of DIN. Hence, lant's income liable to file any income sment is bad to adjudicate money u/s. onfirming the ained money credits in the e same could not be taxes addition of Rs 10) Appellant of alleged un confirmed by D) Addition u/s. 69 – Rs. 11) The learn addition mad investment u/ 12) The learn fixed deposits and it was on which could b addition of R investment u/ 13) Appellant of alleged un confirmed by 2. Briefly stated, f file regular return of view of information through Annual In deposited cash amou recorded reasons to issued notice u/s 14 ‘Act’) on 23.03.2019 not file return of inc Act were issued how Assessee was also is asking to show ca Ms. M ITA as alleged unexplained monay u/s. 69A s. 39,73,291/- was liable to be deleted. t prays that the addition made by the AO nexplained money u/s. 69A of Rs. 39,7 the CIT(A) may be deleted. on account of alleged unexplained 8,98,056/- ned CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in co de by the AO on account of alleged /s. 69 of Rs. 8,98,056/-. ned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the s could not be taxed as the appellant's inc nly the interest element on maturity of fix be taxed as the income of the appellant Rs. 8,98,056/- on account of alleged /s. 69 is liable to be deleted. t prays that the addition made by the AO explained investment u/s. 69 of Rs. 8,9 the CIT(A) may be deleted. facts of the case are that the a f income for the year under co in possession of the Depart nformation Return (AIR) that unting to Rs.13,74,600/-, the A believe that income escaped a 48 of the Income-tax Act,1961 9. Pursuant to the notice also, t come. The various statutory no wever same were not complied b sued a final show cause notice ause as why an amount of Mita Bimol Kristo Mittra 3 A No. 3536/MUM/2025 A. Hence, the O on account 73,291/- and investment onfirming the unexplained e maturity of come u/s. 69 xed deposits, t. Hence, the unexplained O on account 98,056/- and assessee did not onsideration. In tment gathered assessee had Assessing Officer assessment and 1 ( in short the the assessee did otices under the by the assessee. e on 13.11.2019 Rs.39,78,291/- appearing as credit Rs.21,220/- not be t the Act. Further, the deposits of Rs.8,9 Cooperative Bank sh But in view of no res completed the assess the available record a 3. On further appe the assessee before sustained the addit relevant finding of th “6. I have car of appeal, sta response to t written subm appeal have b 6.1 The pres initiated unde Tax Act for around unexp Appellant and Assessing Off 148, 142(1), respond. 6.2 The Appe to source of c under conside 6.3 At the ap written subm been advance Ms. M ITA in the bank account includ treated as unexplained cash mo e AO also asked to show caus 98,056/- with Punjab and ould not be treated as unexplai sponse from the assessee, the A sment invoking section 144 of th and made addition of Rs.48,71,3 eal also no compliance was mad the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, tion dismissing the appeal i e Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as un refully considered the assessment order, atement of facts and the relevant provisio the notices issued under Section 250 of missions and documents in support of the been filed till date. ent appeal pertains to the assessment er Section 147 read with Section 144 of the assessment year 2012-13. The ca plained credits reflecting in the bank ac d unexplained bank deposits during th fficer issued multiple statutory notices un and 144 of the Act, to which the appell ellant has not furnished any explanation cash credits and bank deposits made dur eration. ppellate stage, the appellant has not fu mission in support of his claim. No argu ed by him in his statement of facts and Mita Bimol Kristo Mittra 4 A No. 3536/MUM/2025 ding interest of oney u/s 69A of se why the time d Maharashtra ned investment. Assessing Officer he Act based on 347/-. de on the part of the Ld. CIT(A) n default. The nder: the grounds ons of law. In f the Act, no e grounds of proceedings f the Income ase revolves ccount of the he year. The nder Sections lant failed to with respect ring the year urnished any uments have d grounds of appeal to reb appellant has cash credits contentions a time allowed circumstances presume that of his averme appeal is be record by the the grounds of 6.4 Based on contentions a assessment appellant to cogent mater credits and ba cannot be fau source of the and even in t the appellant nature and s transactions during the ass 6.5. Primarily appeal is liab Hon'ble Apex Court, in the CTR 354) hel appeal but assessee doe have inherent 6.6 Hon. ITAT in case of Tou of Income tax where the a reasonable ca applications f order and res 6.7 Reliance in CIVIL APP Commissione Ltd. Reliance Ms. M ITA but the estimated income determined by s chosen not to furnish a cogent explan along with reliable evidence in sup and grounds of appeal despite ample opp d during the appellate proceedings s, the undersigned is left with no altern t the appellant has no further submission ents made in the grounds of appeal. Acc eing decided keeping in view the facts AO in the assessment order and by the of appeal and statement of facts. n the material available on record, the are not acceptable because of specific fin order about no evidence being addu corroborate the claim made. In the abs rial to explain the nature and source ank deposits in the bank account, the sta ulted. The appellant failed to explain the e cash deposits during the assessment the appellate proceedings. It is a trite la fails to discharge the onus cast on him to source of any sum of money. The gen could not be proved to the satisfaction sessment proceedings. y, as there is no proper response to appea ble to be dismissed in terms of ratio of ve Court and the various High Courts. The H case of CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharjee and ld that "appeal does not mean only filing also pursuing it effectively. In cases es not want to pursue the appeal, the Co t power to dismiss the appeal." T (Cochin Bench) in MP No. 71 to 79 (COC urist Resorts Kerala Ltd. V Assisstant C x Circle -1(1) Thiruvanananthupuram ha assessee has failed to show that th ause for non appearance on date of hearin filed by the assessee for setting aside storing appeal were to be dismissed. is also placed on the Hon' Supreme Cou PEAL NO. 2463 OF 2019 in the case r of Income tax (Central) -1 v. NRA Iron is also placed on the decision of the Hon Mita Bimol Kristo Mittra 5 A No. 3536/MUM/2025 the AO. The nation of the pport of his portunity and s. In such native but to ns in support cordingly, the s brought on appellant in e appellant's ndings in the uced by the sence of any of the bank and of the AO e nature and proceedings aw that once o explain the nuineness of n of the AO al notices, the erdicts of the Hon'ble Apex another (10 g of memo of s where the ourt/Tribunal CH) OF 2013 Commissioner as held that here was a ng of appeal, the ex parte rt judgement of Principal n & Steel (P.) 'ble Supreme

Court in the c taxmann.com
6.8 Based on assessment o submission by decision of the 6.9 Because infirmity in th with the decis
Hence, Grou maintainable.
4. We have heard the relevant materi assessee has subm operative Bank was procure required det not be filed before th submission filed befo assessee is located a mail only and ill hea the assessee submis and the concerned
13.07.2025. The rele as under:
“I most respe not respond t due to the foll
. Accordingly, the same are hereby dismi rival submissions of the parti ials on record. In the groun mitted that the Punjab & Ma s closed, therefore, the asses tails within the time and therefo e Assessing Officer or the Ld. C ore us as available on record, it at Kolkata and due to notices alth of the Chartered Accountan ssion could not be made before
Chartered Accountant ultim evant submission of the assesse ctfully wish to bring to your kind attentio to or attend the hearing notices issued lowing genuine and unavoidable circumst
Mita Bimol Kristo Mittra
6
A No. 3536/MUM/2025
T, [2021] 130
ussion in the f any written rfere with the not find any d to interfere d to be not issed.”
ies and perused nds raised, the aharashtra Co- ssee could not fore, same could
CIT(A). From the transpired that sent through e- nt appearing for e the Ld. CIT(A) mately died on ee is reproduced on that I could by the CIT(A) tances:

Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. Guard file.

////

Ms. M
ITA

The ground No. 1 of the appeal d. Since we have already restore
Assessing Officer, therefore, the dice are not required to be adjud the appeal of the assessee unced in the open Court on 30
d/-
S
AUDHARY)
(OM PRAK
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :

BY ORDER

(Assistant Re

ITAT, Mu

Mita Bimol Kristo Mittra
8
A No. 3536/MUM/2025
l of the assessee ed the matter to e other grounds dicated upon.
is allowed for 0/07/2025. d/-
KASH KANT)
ANT MEMBER
R, gistrar) umbai