Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee failed to file the income tax return for AY 2015-16 and had deposited Rs. 3.61 crore cash in a bank account. The case was reopened under Section 148, and despite notices under Section 142(1), there was no compliance, leading the Assessing Officer to tax the amount as unexplained money under Section 69A. The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the assessee's appeal in-limine for non-prosecution without adjudicating the merits.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 180-day delay in filing the appeal. Citing a Bombay High Court ruling, the Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of appeals on merits. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits, allowing the assessee to present evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in-limine for non-prosecution without adjudicating the merits of the addition of cash deposits as unexplained money under Section 69A, and if the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
148, 142(1), 69A, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2015-15 Ratilal Dagadulal Mutha, Vs. ITO, Ward-14(5), Pune. No.W 181/6A, Gajanana Housing Society, Dound Baramati, Pune- 413801. PAN : ARWPM4183H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue by : Shri Manishkumar Sinha Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 13.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.11.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2015-16.
There is delay of 180 days in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the affidavit for condonation that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay of 180 days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed the return of income for the year under consideration. Based on the information available that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.3.61 crore in the bank account maintained with Shri Laxmi Co-op. Bank Ltd., the case was reopened by way of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the IT Act. Statutory notices u/s 142(1) of the IT Act were issued to the assessee to which there was no compliance. Ld. Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings by bringing to tax the cash credits of Rs.3,61,80,100/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the IT Act.
Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal in- limine for non-prosecution, without adjudicating legal & factual grounds. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the record placed before us. During the course of hearing before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee’s case could not be represented effectively before the authorities for the reasons beyond the control of assessee and prayed to grant one more Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Ld. Departmental Representative was fair enough in not opposing the request of the assessee. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an ex-parte order. In view thereof and without dwelling into merits of the issues and considering the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for necessary adjudication. Assessee is at liberty to support legal grounds & adduce evidences in support of the sources of cash deposit. Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC may call for a remand report from Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and after obtaining the comments of the assessee to such remand report, pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the IT Act. Needless to say, the assessee will be given reasonable opportunity of hearing. Assessee is further directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is set-aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.