Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee contested an addition of Rs. 10,23,000/- made by the AO under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) had dismissed her appeal due to a delay of approximately 1965 days. The assessee explained the delay was due to her husband, who managed her tax matters, passing away during the Covid-19 pandemic, leaving her unaware of the pending proceedings. On merits, the assessee contended the deposits were sourced from a prior withdrawal of Rs. 59 lakhs for a cancelled land sale agreement.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee's explanation as reasonable given the circumstances of her husband's demise and her domestic role. On the merits of the case, the Tribunal found that the assessee had sufficiently explained the source of the cash deposits from earlier withdrawals, and therefore, ordered the deletion of the impugned addition under Section 69A.
Key Issues
1. Whether the significant delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned. 2. Whether the cash deposits made by the assessee were sufficiently explained to avoid addition under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act.
Sections Cited
69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg
Year : 2012-13 Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela ITO Ward 2, बनाम/ Plot no. 1068, Sector-2-D, Gandhinagar – 382 001 v/s. Gandhinagar, Gujarat – 382 007 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AKQPV 8914 N (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Pradeep Tulsian, AR Revenue by : Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 22/12/2025 आदेश/O R D E R The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 12/08/2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13.
The assessee, in this case, has contested the confirmation of addition of Rs.10,23,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela Vs. The ITO Ward 2 Asst. Year: 2012-13 2 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited my attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee being bared by limitation.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that there was a delay of approximately 1965 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). A separate application for condonation of delay was filed before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) considering the inordinate long delay in presenting the appeal, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee has filed a separate affidavit before this Tribunal also, wherein, the reason for delay in filing the appeal has been explained. It has been submitted in the affidavit that, earlier, the husband of the assessee used to look into her income-tax matters. That during Covid-19 pandemic, her husband passed away on 30/04/2021. That assessee being a house-hold lady was not aware of the present income-tax proceedings pending before the AO. That when the tax consultant received the order of the ITAT in an another appeal, only then he noted from the income-tax portal and got the knowledge of the assessment order for the year under consideration. He then informed the assessee of the assessment order passed for the year under consideration. The assessee immediately took corrective steps and filed the appeal before the Ltd. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that though the Ld. CIT(A) has mentioned in the order that in Form No.35, the assessee, herself, has mentioned the date of service the order, but factually that was not correct as due to the specific software requirement of the income-tax department, that picks up the data of service of notice as mentioned in the record /software of the income-tax authorities and it does not allow to mention a different date of service of notice. Therefore, the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee, herself, has mentioned the service of notice as Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela Vs. The ITO Ward 2 Asst. Year: 2012-13 3 05/12/2019 was not due to the fact that the assessee had actually become aware of the passing of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), rather the date has been picked up by the software, itself, of the income-tax portal.
The Ld. DR has submitted that there is an inordinate long delay of more than 5 years in this case and that the explanation given by the assessee is general in nature. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee being barred by limitation.
We have heard the rival contentions of the Ld. Representatives of the parties and gone through the record. Though, there is an inordinate long delay of more than 5 years in this case, however, the facts and circumstances on the file shown that the assessee being a house-hold lady, her husband was looking out the income-tax matters, who has passed away during Covid-19 pandemic on 30/04/2021. It can be well understood that after the death of her husband, the assessee lady might have been left alone and there might be so many responsibilities falling upon her shoulders. The assessee has duly explained that she was not aware of the income-tax proceedings for the year under consideration and that it was only when the order of the Tribunal was sent by the consultant appointed by her husband and he further looked about the other matters showing on the portal and only then he came to know about the passing of the impugned assessment order, which he further informed to the assessee. The assessee, therefore, explained the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).
On merits, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has demonstrated that the assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.59 lakhs on 06/04/2011 from her bank Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela Vs. The ITO Ward 2 Asst. Year: 2012-13