DITTO DINAHARAN,THIRUVALLUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THIRUVALLUR

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.02.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2012-13.

We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 218 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and the Assessing Officer received information that the assessee made cash deposit of ₹.15,35,600/- in his bank account and the assessee did not file return of income for said assessment year. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and the notice under section 142(1) of the Act was also issued. However, there was no response from the assessee. After verifying the details from the bank statement obtained under section 133(6) of the Act, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained money and added to the total income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer since there was no response from assessee against the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A).

The ld. AR Shri Akshit A Jain, C.A. submits that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year under consideration and placed on record copy of the return filed by the assessee. He further submits that the assessee filed his written submissions in support of the grounds raised before the ld. CIT(A) and placed on record View Response to Notice ID 100073613786, which was not considered by the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR prayed to afford an opportunity to the assessee as the assessee is ready to prosecute his case before the Assessing Officer since the assessment was completed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act without considering the return of income filed by the assessee.

The ld. DR Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT fairly conceded that the matter may be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2012-13, which was duly acknowledged by the Department on 21.05.2013. However, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 21.12.2019 without considering the return of income filed by the assessee. We find the Assessing Officer made addition under section 69A of the Act, which requires assistance; undoubtedly, there was no assistance from the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer brought to tax the entire cash deposit as unexplained money on the ground that the assessee did not file his return of income. The ld. CIT(A) observed that no submission has been filed despite various opportunities afforded, but, however, the assessee filed his written submissions in support of the grounds raised as could be evident from View Response to Notice ID 100073613786 placed on record. Taking into consideration of the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, before the Assessing Officer. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 23rd January, 2025 at Chennai.