DEEPALI RAMDAS PARTE,MUMBAI vs. ITO 2(1), THANE

The appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by limitation by 236 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit stating that the assessee was not aware of the provisions of the income tax and her brother was helping her in the income tax matters. Hence, the assessee was not aware of the order passed by the Addl/JCIT(A). Subsequently, when the pending appeal was discussed with the Chartered Accountant, the assessee came to know that the Addl/JCIT(A) has already passed the order. Immediately, the assessee took steps to file the present appeal. Accordingly, it is submitted thatthe delay in filing the appeal was on account of reasonable cause and accordingly, it is prayed that the delay may be condoned.

We heard the Ld.DR on this preliminary issue and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by the Ld.AR, we are of the view that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee in filing the appeal belatedly and accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.

The facts relating to the case are stated in brief. The AO received information that the assessee has deposited a sum of Rs. 20,70,254/- in the bank account during the demonetization period. The AO noticed that the assessee has not filed the return of income and hence, he issued notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act to the assessee and directed the assessee to file the return of income. However, the assessee did not respond to the same. Hence, the AO called for the details of the bank account from the Vasai Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. Branch. The Bank Manager reported that the bank account noticed by the AO does not belong to the assessee. However, he furnished the details of the bank accounts held by the assessee with that bank. It was noticed that the assessee was having two bank accounts with the above said branch; wherein the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs. 3,75,000/- during demonetization period.

Hence, the AO issued show cause notice to the assessee asking for details of sources of the above said deposit. The assessee replied to the above said notice; wherein the assessee stated that the deposits were made out of her income and savings. The AO noticed that the assessee had filed return of income for the subsequent assessment year, namely, AYs. 2018-19 and 2019-20; wherein the assessee had declared total income of Rs. 1,45,330/- and Rs. 1,43,680/- respectively. The AO took the view that the deposit of Rs. 3.75 lakhs made by the assessee during the demonetization period was not commensurate to the income declared by the assessee. Hence, the AO treated above amount as „un- explained money‟ and assessed the same as income of the assessee u/s. 69A of the Act. The Addl/JCIT(A) also confirmed the same and hence, the assessee filed this appeal.

We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that the AOhas taken up the case of the assessee on the reasoning that the assessee has made cash deposit of Rs. 20.70 lakhs in the bank account maintained with Vasai Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd. Branch. However, it turned out to be incorrect on the basis of the letter given by the Bank Manager. Hence, the very basis on which the case was taken up for scrutiny has failed in this case. However, the AO received information from the bank that the assessee has deposited a sum of Rs.3.75 lakhs during the demonetization period. Though the assessee has explained that the said deposit was made out of her earning and saving, yet the AO dis-believed the same and accordingly assessed the above said amount as income of the assessee u/s. 69A of the Act.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.