MUNNALAL,KAJLANA, MOLANA, BADNAGAR, UJJAIN vs. ITO, UJJAIN, UJJAIN
Facts
The assessee is aggrieved by an order confirming additions of Rs. 89,74,500/- for unexplained cash deposits made in bank accounts for AY 2018-19. The assessee did not file his return and was non-responsive to notices, leading to an ex-parte assessment order.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee was not given adequate opportunity to present their case due to short notice periods and the assessee's lack of technical proficiency and rural background. The Tribunal also noted that the revenue did not effectively rebut the assessee's contentions.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) considering their background and the short notice periods.
Sections Cited
253, 147, 144, 69A, 139, 148, 148A, 142(1), 246A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI PARESH M JOSHI & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH
Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section 253 of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for
sake of brevity) before this Tribunal as and by way of second
appeal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number
ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069646376(1) dated 14.10.2024
of Ld. CIT(A) which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned
order”. The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19 and the
Page 1 of 8
Munnalal ITA No. 887/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19 corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2017 to
31.03.2018.
FACTUAL MATRIX
2.1 That as and by way of an assessment order made u/s 147
r.w.s. 144 of the Act, the assesee’s total income was determined
and computed at Rs.89,78,173/- exigible to tax. Additions were
made on account of unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act to
the tune of Rs.89,74,500/- which was found to have been
credited in to assessee’s Axis Bank saving account. The
aforesaid amount was deposited in cash. There was sale of
equity share of Rs.3,673/- which too was treated as Short Term
Capital Gain.
2.2 The assessee had not filed his return of income for
Assessment Year 2018-19 both u/s 139 & u/s 147/148/148A
of the Act.
2.3 Before passing the assessment order the Ld. A.O had issued
following notice(s) u/s 148/142(1) of the Act to the assessee
which are tabulated as below:-
Notice Date of issue Due date compliance Remarks 148A(b) 15.03.2022 23.03.2022 No response
Page 2 of 8
Munnalal ITA No. 887/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19 148 29.03.2022 20.04.2022 No response
142(1) 13.12.2022 28.12.2022 No response
142(1) 04.01.2023 12.01.2023 No response
142(1) 19.02.2023 28.02.2023 No response
142(1) 20.03.2023 22.03.2023 No response
2.4 Since the assessee was totally non responsive the Ld.
Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of Section 144 and
passed assessment order bearing Number
ITBA/AST/S/147/2022-23/1051697318(1) dated 30.03.2023
which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment
order”.
2.5 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid
“impugned assessment order” prefers first appeal u/s 246A of
the Act before Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has
dismissed the 1st appeal of the assessee.
2.6 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned order”
has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and
has raised following grounds of appeal in Form No.36 against the
“impugned order” which are as under:-
Page 3 of 8
Munnalal ITA No. 887/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19 “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the notice U/s. 148/142(1) and Order U/s. 147 r.w.s.144 passed in the case of the appellant are wrong and invalid.
That the confirmation by Ld. CIT(A), of addition U/s. 69A at Rs. 89,74,500/-on account of alleged unexplained cash deposit in bank account, is also wrong, invalid and unjustified.
(In the nature of submissions): That in the case of the appellant: (a) the appellant did not received reasonable/sufficient opportunity during assessment as the various notices issued by the Income Tax Officer u/s 148/142(1) was not received by him physically therefore he could not explain cash deposit source before the Ld. AO, and (b) the appellant did not received reasonable/sufficient opportunity before the Ld. CIT(A) as he got merely seventeen days from the date of issuance of fist hearing notice till the due date of compliance of last notice through email and the appellant is uneducated and is solely engaged in agricultural activities and does not use email frequently; and
4 (c) the appellant at the time of filing appeal under Form 35 duly submitted before the Ld. CIT(A), the evidences of agricultural receipts i.e., agricultural produce sale bills, crop certificate cum land holding certificate issued by government authority, copy of agricultural KCC bank account, copy of saving bank account etc. but the Ld. CIT(A) has not either seen/not properly appreciated them, and (d) as per ITBA (Income Tax Business Application) information, notice from Income Tax department showing cash deposits in one or more accounts (other than a current account and time deposit) amounting to Rs. 89,74,500/-. However the bank account of the appellant showing cash deposit of Rs. 30,89,500/- during the year in the Saving Account of Axis Bank having Account No. 917010041469976 and KCC Account of Axis Bank having Account No. 917030054192315. Further, there is no other cash deposit in any other bank account of the appellant; and
5 (e) the above cash deposit of Rs. 30,89,500/- pertains to receipts from sale of agriculture produce and milk where the amount is cited and withdrew from time to time as per the needs of the same and (f) the land holding was about 35 Bighas and around 15-20 buffalo, considering them the amount of cash deposit is reasonable and the bills for the sale of agricultural produce and milk throughout the year are also available”.
Page 4 of 8
Munnalal ITA No. 887/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19
Record of Hearing
3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on
04.06.2025 when the Ld. AR for and on behalf of the assessee
appeared before us and interalia contended that the “impugned
order” is bad in law, illegal and not proper. The “impugned
order” is also in violation of principle of natural justice. The
“impugned order” thus deserves to be set aside. The Ld. AR has
placed on records of this Tribunal today a brief write up in
support of his case wherein it has been urged that notice(s)
issued by Ld. Assessing Officer (supra)were never received by the
assessee in physical form. Further Ld. CIT(A) gave too short time
of 17 days from date of issuance of first hearing notice till the
date of due compliance of last notice. It was urged that
assessee is an agriculturist by profession and does not use e-
mail facility frequently. Details of bank statements, agriculture
produce sale bills, copy of agricultural KCC bank account, crop
certificate cum land holding certificate issued by government
authority etc are too placed in write up given today. Per contra
Ld. DR appearing for and on behalf of the revenue has submitted
Page 5 of 8
Munnalal ITA No. 887/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19 that both “impugned assessment order” and so also
“impugned order” are not on merits and hence in view of
submissions made today by Ld. AR it would be just and fair that
matter be adjudged afresh by Ld. Assessing Officer wherein all
papers, documents, evidences now placed in write up given can
be looked into. Finally Ld. DR has said that the “impugned
order” be set aside and the matter be relegated back to the file of
Ld. Assessing Officer so that correct determination of income can
take place according to law.
Observations,findings & conclusions.
4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and the
proprietery of the “impugned order” basis records of the case
and rival contentions canvassed before us.
4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case.
4.3 We basis records of the case so also after hearing and upon
examining the contentions are of the considered opinion that the
“impugned order” has given too short a time to the assessee to
present his case. We notice and observe that first notice is dated
10.09.2024 and date of compliance was 17.09.2024, second
notice was dated 19.09.2024 with date of compliance on
Page 6 of 8
Munnalal ITA No. 887/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19 23.09.2024 and the last notice was dated 24.09.2024 with date of
compliance on 27.09.2024. We on cumulative analysis of
notice(s) (supra) finds that between first date of notice i.e.
10.09.2024 and last date of notice dated 24.09.2024 in all 14
days time gap is provided and for the purpose of compliances in
all 10 days time period is provided from date of first compliance
to last compliance date (17.09.2024 to 27.09.2024). The
assessee is not tech savy person he is an agriculturist in rural
area of India. The Ld. AR has successfully demonstrated that
short gap of time has caused prejudice. The Ld. DR has not
effectively rebutted the contentions of Ld. AR on any cogent
grounds on the contrary Ld. DR has stated that matter should be
relegated back to the file of Ld. A.O. In brief Ld. DR for and on
behalf of revenue too desires meritorious disposal of the case.
4.4 In the premises drawn up by us as aforesaid we set aside
the “impugned order” and remand the case back to the file of
Ld. A.O with a direction to pass a speaking and well reasoned
order on merits. We direct the assessee to place on record of Ld.
A.O file of assessment all the relevant and material papers.
Documents, evidences having bearing on his income and its
Page 7 of 8
Munnalal ITA No. 887/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2018-19 sources and such other papers and documents like land deed,
crop pattern, crop produced and mandi receipts evidencing from
which sources income is derived at. The Ld. A.O would be free
to examine and verify such papers and documents as he deem it
in accordance with law.
Order
5.1 The “impugned order” is set aside as and by way of
remand back to the file of Ld. A.O.
5.2 Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 06.06.2025.
Sd/- Sd/-
(BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Indore िदनांक / Dated : 06/06/2025 Dev/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 8 of 8
