PARMINDER SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD 3(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal admitted additional evidence (J Forms, jamabandi, bank statements) and restored the matter, including related penalty proceedings under Sections 271AAC(1) and 272A(1)(d), to the file of the AO for fresh examination and decision, providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an agriculturist, filed a NIL return. The case was scrutinized for cash deposits during demonetization, leading to an assessment order under Section 144 where Rs. 27,89,000/- was taxed as unexplained money under Section 69A. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order ex-parte after the assessee's request to adjourn for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme was disregarded.
What were the issues?
Whether cash deposits during demonetization constitute unexplained money, admissibility of additional evidence, and the proper procedure for assessment and penalty proceedings given an ex-parte order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 144,Section 69A,Section 271AAC(1),Section 272A(1)(d)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “एस.एम.सी” , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, “SMC” CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: HYBRID MODE "ी िव"म "सह यादव, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM आयकर अपील सं./ TO 660/Chd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Parminder Singh बनाम The ITO C/o VV Bhalla & Company, Ward 3(1) SCF-39, Rishi Nagar Main Ludhiana Market, Ludhiana "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: FCGPS6720C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent िनधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Pankaj Bhalla, C.A(Virtual) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21/08/2025 उदघोषणा क" तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22/08/2025 आदेश/Order PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM These are three separate appeals filed by the Assessee against the respective orders of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi each dt. 07/03/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18.
During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is an agriculturist and had filed NIL return of income. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny to examine cash deposited during the demonetization period and thereafter, the assessment order was passed under section 144 wherein the AO brought to tax an amount of Rs. 27,89,000/- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act.
Against the order of the AO, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was submitted during the course of appellate proceeding, the assessee requested the Ld. CIT(A) to adjourn the matter on the ground that the assessee is contemplating to avail the benefit of Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme. However the Ld. CIT(A) disregarded the request and proceeded to pass the ex-parte order.
It was submitted that as the assessee could not finally opt for the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme and is serious about prosecuting the present appeal, the assessee be allowed one more opportunity and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. AO. In this regard, it was submitted that that the assessee wishes to placed on record the additional evidence in the form of J Forms, copy of jamabandi and bank statements to substantiate the nature and source of cash deposits and has moved an application seeking permission to submit the aforesaid additional evidence. It was submitted that in the interest of substantial justice, the additional evidences which are germane to the issue under consideration be admitted and the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. AO for necessary examination/verification.
The Ld. DR has been heard who has relied on the order passed by the AO as well as of the Ld. CIT(A). At the same the Ld. DR did not raised any specific objection where the matter is remanded back to the file of the Ld. AO.
Heard both the parties and considered the material available on the record. It is noticed that the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs. 27,89,000/- as unexplained deposits in the bank account maintained by the assessee as the assessee failed to explain the nature and source of such deposit and thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order of the AO and has dismissed the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee. On merits, no finding has been recorded either by the AO or by the Ld. CIT(A). Given that assessee has come forward and serious about prosecuting the matter and has also submitted the additional evidence which, I find, germane to the issue under consideration, I deem it appropriate to admit the additional evidence so submitted and restore the matter to the file of the AO to examine the additional evidence so submitted by the assessee and after calling for any further/information as required decide the matter afresh as per law. Needless to say, the assessee shall attend to the proceedings and shall submit necessary information/documents and is at liberty to raise necessary contentions available under law.
In light of the aforesaid where the matter in the quantum proceedings is set aside to the file of the AO, the other two matters relating to levy of penalty u/s 271AAC(1) and u/s 272A(1)(d) are also set aside to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh as per law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Gr Infra Projects Limited Ratlam Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Pankaj Das vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026