PARMINDER SINGH MANES,ZIRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR
Facts
The assessee, claiming to be an agriculturist, deposited cash of Rs. 69.45 lakhs in his bank account, which remained unexplained and was added to his total income. The first appeal was dismissed ex-parte as the assessee did not represent the case despite notices.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and, in the interest of justice, remanded the matter back to the first appellate authority to grant the assessee an opportunity to present his case with necessary evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present his case before the first appellate authority with documentary evidence for unexplained cash deposits, considering alleged non-receipt of notices.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 263
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi dated 16.06.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (henceforth the Act) which has emanated from the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 21.03.2023 passed
u/s 147 r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2 I.T.A. No. 925/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 2. 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.
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.
The Ld. DR has no objection.
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.
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.
3 I.T.A. No. 925/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 7. 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.
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.
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 ).
4 I.T.A. No. 925/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 10. 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.
We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and all issues are left
open.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court as on 20.03.2026
Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. Dipak P. Ripote) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order
