Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee failed to file an income tax return for AY 2017-18 and also failed to respond to various notices. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions to income under section 144 for unexplained credits and cash deposits. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed due to a delay of 113 days in filing.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC, citing the plausible and sufficient cause related to the demise of the assessee's husband. The Tribunal found it appropriate to remit the entire issue to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC should be condoned, and if the matter should be remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
142(1), 69A, 144, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 03.02.2025 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072846327(1) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) for the assessment year 2017-18.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, being an individual, did not file any return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 and accordingly, a notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 30.11.2017 calling to file the return of income. The assessee failed to file the return of income in spite of having huge cash deposits made into bank accounts during the year under consideration. Subsequently, the AO issued another notice u/s 142(1) of the Act calling for specific details in support of cash deposits & other credits into the bank account; however, the assessee again failed to comply with the notice. Lastly, the SCN dated 25.9.2019 was issued to the assessee to show cause as to why the cash deposits made amounting to Rs.25,51,000/- into the bank account should not be considered as unexplained cash credit u/s 69A of the Act, and also why the credits other than cash of Rs.1,85,37,040/- into the bank account should not be considered as unexplained income. The assessee was provided time until 26.9.2019 i.e. only 1(one) day to respond to the show cause notice, and in the absence of a reply from the assessee, the AO completed the assessment as best of his judgment u/s 144 of the Act on 28.9.2019 by adding entire credits into bank account amounting to Rs.2,10,88,040/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act.
Aggrieved by the order of the ld. AO passed u/s 144 of the Act dated 28.9.2019, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. The ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay of 113 days in filing the appeal before him.
Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, the assessee has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has also filed a paper book comprising 73 pages containing therein various
Page 4 of 6 documents/records/reports/statement/agreement/judgement relied upon by the assessee.
Before us, the ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that the ld. AO had issued a show cause notice on 25.9.019 and asked the assessee to file his reply on 26.9.2019 and had given just 1 (one) day time to file a reply, whereas the limitation for completion of assessment for the assessment year 2017-18 was 31.12.2019. Further, ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC also did not condone the delay in filing the appeal and dismissed the appeal without hearing on the merits of the case, and accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to represent his case before the AO.
Ld. D.R. on the other hand supported the order of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee was unable to represent his case before the AO, and the AO issued a show-cause notice on 25.9.2019, requesting the assessee to file his response by 26.9.2019, thereby giving just one day's time. Thereafter, the AO passed an order on 28.9.2019 in haste, whereas the limitation for completion of assessment for the AY 2017-18 ended only on 31/12/2019 as pointed out by the AR of the assessee. It is also an undisputed fact that even the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the assessee’s appeal by not condoning the delay of 113 days in filing the appeal. Before us, ld. A.R. of the assessee drew our attention to the employment letter of the assessee’s husband, as well as a copy of the BOSH Hospital Death report of the assessee’s husband, and submitted that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC grossly erred in not condoning the delay of 113 days. On going through the paper book, we take a Page 5 of 6 note of the fact that assessee’s husband was diagnosed with serious cardiac function and was in ICU care for ventilator support due to breathing difficulty. The assessee’s husband was admitted to the hospital several times due to breathing difficulties and other medical complications. Finally, the assessee’s husband passed away on 27.5.2020. After reviewing the records and hearing the ld. Counsels for the respective parties, it is perceived that the explanation offered in the condonation application is plausible and sufficient cause is shown by the assessee, which prevented her from filing the appeal within the specified period before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and accordingly, we are inclined to condone the delay. Since the assessee could not represent her case before the AO as well, we are of the considered opinion that it will be just & proper to remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of the AO to decide afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, a reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce all the documents/records/bank statements/agreements or any other documents produced before us by way of a paper book or as may be directed by the AO for proper adjudication of the case. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 7th Oct, 2025