Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Raxit Mahendra Shah, a jeweler, filed an ROI for AY 2017-18, later revised. During scrutiny, he failed to explain Rs. 83,00,000/- cash deposits during demonetization, leading the AO to add this amount as unexplained cash credit under Section 68, taxed under Section 115BBE. The assessee's appeal to the Additional CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of over 700 days and non-submission of supporting documents for condonation or non-appearance.
Held
The Tribunal observed that neither the assessee nor his Authorized Representative appeared for multiple scheduled hearings and no adjournment requests or evidence were filed. Consequently, finding no merits in the grounds raised due to the lack of supporting details before lower authorities and the Tribunal, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of Rs. 83,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 was justified; Whether the CIT(A) was correct in dismissing the appeal due to delay and non-compliance; Whether the appeal before the Tribunal should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the non-appearance of the assessee/AR.
Sections Cited
144, 68, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH
Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR
Assessee Represented: None Revenue Represented: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 29-07-2025 Date of pronouncement : 30-07-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 25.02.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi arising out of the exparte assessment order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18.
A.Y. 2017-18 Page No 2 Raxit Mahendra Shah (Prop. of Alankar Jewellers) Vs. ITO
Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual engaged in Jewellery business and Proprietor of M/s. Alankar Jewellwers. For the Asst. Year 2017-18, assesse filed his Return of Income on 26-12-2017 declaring total income of Rs.9,41,340/-. Thereafter a revised Return of Income filed on 22-10-2018 declaring total income of Rs.2,10,500/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment and more than six notices were issued to the assessee to explain the cash deposits of Rs.83,00,000/- made in two bank accounts during demonetization period. The assessee failed to reply to the final show cause notice dated 13-12-2019 thereby the assessing officer made addition of Rs.83,00,000/- as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act and taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act.
3. Aggrieved against the exparte assessment order dated 19-12- 2019, the assessee filed an appeal before Additional CIT(A) on 28- 01-2022 with more than delay of 700 days. The assessee stated that due to his ill-health, he could not file the appeal within 30 days and requested to condone the delay. However no supporting documents placed before Addl.CIT(A) who has given hearing notices on 08-01-2024, 22-01-2024, 30-01-2024 and 18-02-2025. As there was no response, the Addl.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal since no evidence filed before the appellate authority.
Aggrieved against the exparte appellate order, assesse filed appeal well within time before this Tribunal by raising the following Grounds of Appeal:
A.Y. 2017-18 Page No 3 Raxit Mahendra Shah (Prop. of Alankar Jewellers) Vs. ITO Your appellant being aggrieved by the vide Appeal order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1073721892(1) vide appeal no. 17/100666972 dated 25.02.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal Add/JCIT (A) Ranchi dated 25.02.2025 which is received by us dated 28.02.2025 against Order Passed By learned Assessing Officer (Ward-4(2)(4), Ahmedabad) u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, present this appeal against the same on the following amongst the other grounds.
The Learned Assessing officer has grossly erred in assessing the total income at Rs. 92,41,340/- by making various additions on estimation basis. Your appellant submits that all details and evidences called for, had been provided during the course of assessment proceedings. Under the circumstances, there is no justification in making such a high pitch assessment and estimating the total income. Your appellant was not given proper opportunity to explain the details asked for. It is therefore submitted that the said order be held as bad in law and be cancelled. It is submitted that it be so held now.
2. The learned assessing officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 83,00,000/- as under sanction 68. as average balance of investment and that too without granting opportunity of being heard. It is therefore submitted that the addition made is illegal and therefore requires to be deleted. It is submitted that it be so deleted now.
The appellant also requests you to waive the income tax amount of Rs. 86,82,788/- and interest, penalty and any other levied amount.
4. The appellant craves for leave to add, alter or amend any of the ground of appeal
on or before the final date of hearing.
5. To stay the demand till the disposal of hearing.
5. When the appeal was fixed for hearing on 23-06-2025, assessee sought for adjournment due to personal difficulty of the Chartered Accountant who has handling the above appeal. Since the Bench was not functioning on that day, the case was adjourned to 28-07- 2025. Again on 28-07-2025 neither the assessee or the Authorized Representative appeared for the hearing nor filed letter seeking adjournment. Since none appeared on behalf of the assessee by virtual mode, the case was adjourned to 29-07-2025, again none A.Y. 2017-18 Page No 4 Raxit Mahendra Shah (Prop. of Alankar Jewellers) Vs. ITO appeared on behalf of the assessee not filed any evidences in support of its Grounds. In the absence of any details before Lower Authorities as well as before this Tribunal, we do not find any merits in the grounds raised by the assessee. Therefore the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30 -07-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 30/07/2025 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file.