Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order, which upheld an addition of Rs. 65,90,141/- as unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A and the initiation of penalty under Section 270A. The assessee had failed to provide details and explanations before the lower authorities, leading to an ex parte dismissal by the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal, noting the assessee's non-compliance but also considering the counsel's request for a fresh opportunity, decided to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. The assessee is directed to furnish all relevant documents and comply with notices without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in upholding the addition of unexplained cash deposit under Section 69A and penalty under Section 270A ex parte. 2. Whether the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee a fresh opportunity for compliance.
Sections Cited
69A, 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 11.11.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 2.
1. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact of the case in passing the impugned order ex parte. Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2–
2. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld.AO in making an addition of Rs.65,90,141/- as unexplained cash deposit u/s.69A of the Act.
3. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of AO in initiating penalty u/s.270A of the Act which is wholly unsustainable in law and on facts of the case.
3. On perusal of the records, it is observed that the assessee was afforded sufficient opportunities of hearing to furnish details, clarifications, and explanations to substantiate the source of cash deposits. However, assessee failed to furnish the substantial details or explanations before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), based on the material available on record, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal ex parte. We find that the assessee remained non compliant and failed to submit any details or supporting evidence in respect of unexplained money even before the Assessing Officer. During the course of hearing before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, due compliance will be made and would furnish all the necessary details, clarifications and explanations before the revenue authorities. Considering the totality of the facts and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for conducting the assessment de novo. The assessee is directed to furnish all relevant documents, evidences, and bank details before the Revenue authorities and to comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer without seeking unnecessary adjournments Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.