SMT. RADHA LAKSHMI MANNEM,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(5), BANGALORE

Present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 20.9.2024 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069083184(1) and relates to assessment year 2017-18. Facts of the case: -

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a lady could not file any income tax return within the prescribed time. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny for examining the source of cash deposited by the assessee during the demonetization period. However, the assessee could not appear before the ld. AO in spite of several notices and hence, the AO framed the assessment Smt. Radha Lakshmi Mannem, Bangalore Page 2 of 3 order u/s 144 of the Act by adding the entire sum deposited by the assessee in her bank account as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”).

Aggrieved with the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). In form number 35 it has been contended that the assessee is computing her income by applying the provisions of section 44AB of the Act and in the impugned year, the income of the assessee was below taxable limit and hence, the assessee could not file the return of income. The assessee has also tried to explain the source of the cash deposit. However, no one appeared before the ld. CIT(A) after filing the appeal. The ld. CIT(A) has issued 3 notices to the assessee but all have been remained un-complied and hence the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte.

Now the assessee has come up in appeal before us and has raised 11 grounds of appeal. However, ld. Counsel for the assessee appearing on behalf of the assessee craved for one more opportunity before the AO for presenting the case in proper manner.