MITHILESH SINGH ,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 974/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s order non-speaking and set aside both the CIT(A)'s and AO's ex-parte orders. The matter was restored to the file of the AO for re-adjudication, with directions to grant the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing and for the assessee to cooperate by providing necessary details.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order, which had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The underlying assessment order, passed ex-parte by the AO, involved additions for cash deposits during demonetization (unexplained money u/s 69A, Section 115BBE) and estimated income from bank credit entries (u/s 69A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing an appeal ex-parte without proper adjudication on merits, and whether the ex-parte additions made by the AO under Section 69A and 115BBE were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 271AAC,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 15.07.2025Pronounced: 23.07.2025

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण,च�डीगढ़ �यायपीठ , च�डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम Shri Mithilesh Singh, The ITO, R/o H.No. B12, BRS Nagar, Ward 6(1), VS PWSSB Colony, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. �थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: DFWPS1033D अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent �नधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : None (Adjournment Application ) राज�व क� ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 15.07.2025 उदघोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 PHYSICAL HEARING आदेश/ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP

The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 27.05.2024 passed for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri Pankaj Bhalla filed an application for adjournment. However, after perusal of the record, we do not find any ground to adjourn the hearing.

ITA-974/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 2

3.

With the assistance of ld. DR, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that impugned order of the ld. CIT is totally non speaking, which reads as under : The appeal is filed against the order of ITO, Ward-VII(4),JCIT-VII,CIT- lll,Ludhiana,Panjab passed u/s 144 of the I T Act 1961, dated 20.12.2019. 1. Ground no.1 & 2 objects to passing the order exparte u/s 144 due to non- cooperation of the assessee. 2. Ground no.3 objects to addition made u/s 69A read with section 115BBE. Cash deposits of Rs.8453500 made during the relevant FY including the demonetization period, was rightly treated by the AO as unexplained money u/s69A. The above amount is from undisclosed sources, tax will be charged on the income as per provision of section 115BBE. 3. Ground no.4 objects to addition of Rs.8000 on account of estimated income of credit entries in the bank statement u/s69A. In the absence of any explanation from the assessee on the nature of debit/credit entries, it is presumed that credit entries may be receipts from some sources of income liable to tax. On these credits receipt of income is estimated by the AO at the rate of 8% worked out at Rs.8000 . The addition of Rs.8000 is confirmed.

4.

Ground on initiation of penal proceedings u/s271 AAC is consequential in nature and does not require any separate adjudication.

5.

The last ground is general in nature and does not require any separate adjudication. 6. The appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.”

4. Sub-clause (6) of Section 250 contemplates that ld. CIT (Appeals) would state the points of dispute and thereafter record reasons in support of the conclusion on those points. Though the appeal has been dismissed for want of prosecution and assessment order was also ex-parte, but ld. CIT ought to have call for the complete information possessed by the AO and thereafter, adjudicate the issue on merit. We also find that ITA-974/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 3 addition has been made by the AO on account of cash deposit in the Union Bank of India during demonetization.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →