Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee challenged an order which treated Rs. 10,20,000/- of cash deposits as unexplained income under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanation for the source and nature of these deposits during assessment and appellate proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee could not adequately represent their case and had missed multiple opportunities. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remit the issue back to the AO for fresh consideration, granting the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate their claim.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was given adequate opportunity to present their case and whether the issue should be remitted to the AO for fresh consideration due to lack of satisfactory explanation of cash deposits.
Sections Cited
69A, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC’’ 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. Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Delhi dated 8.11.2024 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1070214098(1) passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for the assessment year 2015-16.
The assessee has raised 12 grounds of appeal.
3. We take note of the fact that during the course of Assessment proceedings, as the assessee had failed to prove satisfactorily the source and nature of a credit entry in his books/ investments made, the AO held that an amount of Rs. 10,20,000/- being 1/3rd of the Meeran Abdul Zahid, Bellary Page 2 of 3 total cash deposited of Rs. 30,50,000/- as unexplained cash deposits u/s 69A of the Act and added as Income under head “Income from other sources”. Further, we also take note of the fact that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee could not submit any response despite four opportunities granted to the assessee. The ld. A.R. of the assessee vehemently submitted that assessee could not represent his case before both the authorities and accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be granted before the AO to substantiate his claim. This being so, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit & proper to remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of AO for fresh consideration 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 cooperate with the proceedings before the revenue authorities and file the necessary documents/submissions/information/books & records which would be essential and required by the revenue authorities for proper adjudication of the case. We clarify that in case of further default, the assessee shall not be entitled to any leniency. 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 22nd Sept, 2025