Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2017-18. The grounds of appeal challenged the AO's treatment of certain credit entries as business turnover and unexplained money, and the subsequent addition made by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to appear for multiple hearings and did not file any adjournment applications. The Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities' orders. The Tribunal inferred the assessee's lack of interest and dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution.
Key Issues
Whether the additions made by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) on account of alleged unexplained money and business income were justified. Whether the assessee's failure to appear for hearings warranted dismissal of the appeal.
Sections Cited
69A, 115BBE, 44AD
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sandeep Kumar v. Income Tax Officer M/s Sandeep Traders, Ward-2(4) Abdullapur, Miyaganj, Unna- Makhi House, Civil Lines, 209801. Unnao-204150. PAN:DCMPK4762C अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant by: None प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent by: Shri Amit Kumar, Sr. DR सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date of hearing: 25 11 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date of 27 11 2025 pronouncement: O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the Learned Addl/JCIT Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)- 5, Mumbai dated 29.08.2024 pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -
1. THAT the AO as well as CIT(A)/NFAC has failed to appreciated that total credit entries amounting to Rs.73,16,000/- which was credited by the parties as well as outstanding proceeds received. The AO as well as CIT(A) has treated as Rs.68,06,000/- as turnover of business and Rs.5,10,000/- as unexplained money u/s.69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act.
2. THAT the AO as well as CIT(A)/NFAC has taken the amount of Rs.68,06,000/- as business received and worked out 8% tax u/s.44AD amounting to Rs.5,44,480/- and added the same, whereas the margin in this type of trading business is about 3%, the addition made by the AO and upheld by CIT(A) is erroneous bad in law be deleted.
Page 2 of 3 3. THAT the AO as well as has failed to appreciate that Rs.5,10,000/- being old SBN deposited in bank account duly recorded in books of accounts, the said amount is last year balances, which was credited in this year, cannot be treated as undisclosed or unexplained. The AO has wrong applied the provisions of section 69A of the Act and upheld by the CIT(A), the addition made be deleted.
THAT the appellant craves leaves to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.”
2. At the time of hearing, no one attended the proceedings on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was taken up for hearing in the absence of the assessee and is being disposed of on the basis of the material available on record.
Apropos to the grounds of appeal, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities and contended that the assessee grossly failed to support with evidence opening balance of cash in hand as on 08.11.2016. Therefore, the authorities below were justified in making the addition and sustaining the same.
4. Heard the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and perused the material available on records. A perusal of the order sheet entries shows that this appeal was filed on 16.10.2024 and since then the appeal has been adjourned on various occasions i.e. 04.12.2024, 17.04.2025, 23,04.2025, 29.05.2025, 28.10.2025 and 25.11.2025, however, neither did anyone appear on behalf of the assessee nor was any application for seeking adjournment is filed by the assessee. Under these circumstances, it is inferred that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the present appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. However, strictly in terms of the proviso to Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, the assessee is at liberty to approach this Tribunal for recall of this order and Page 3 of 3 restoration of the appeal, provided the assessee can demonstrate a sufficient cause for non-appearance on the date of hearing.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/11/2025.