PARMINDER SINGH MANES,ZIRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR

The ld. DR filed an application for adjournment of hearing on the ground of complexity of issues involved and heavy work load, which we consider are not sufficient reasons for adjournment and as such the adjournment is rejected and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. 3. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that the appeal is filed belatedly by 88 (eighty-eight) days and the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating that since no physical order in first appeal has been served on him, he was not aware of the very existence of the order , because he is technically competent to access the portal and after being informed by his counsel , he took immediate steps to prepare and file this appeal belated by eighty eight days , which was unintentional and he prayed for condonation of the delay. 4. The Ld. DR has no objection. 5. Considering the reasons we are satisfied that there is no intentional neglect on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal and as such we condone the delay and admit the same for adjudication on merits. 6. The assessee has taken eight grounds in appeal but the main grievance is against the sustaining of the addition of Rs. 69.45 lakhs by the Ld. CIT (A) on account of cash deposited in bank account, which has remained unexplained.

Brief facts are that the assessee has claimed to be an agriculturist and has deposited cash in his savings bank account with BOI, out of which an amount of Rs.69.45 has remained unexplained , and the same has been added back to the total income , against which the matter carried in first appeal has remained unrepresented in spite of notices being issued on six separate dates (as evident from para – 5 of the appellate order), to the registered email address of the assessee. 8. In absence of any documentary evidence of agricultural land holdings, supporting the claim of agricultural income, and in absence of any evidence to substantiate the cash flow statement furnished before the appellate authority, the appeal has been dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) without adjudication on merits. 9. Now the assessee is before the tribunal praying for an opportunity to present his case before the Ld. first appellate authority with documentary evidences in order to explain his agricultural income and has submitted that the email id as per form 35 was different and notice has never been issued to the same and as such no representation could be made by the counsel of the assessee and has submitted that the entire cash deposits in bank are out of agricultural proceeds and out of cash withdrawals from bank accounts , which are readily explainable (even though no documentary evidences by way of paper book has been filed before us ).

However, in the interest of justice we remand the matter back to the Ld first appellate authority to allow the assessee one more opportunity to explain his case with necessary evidences and we also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with appellate proceedings. 11. We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and all issues are left open. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.