PERTHVI SINGH YADAV,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-31(5), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer, granting a final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the source of cash deposits and bank drafts. The assessee is directed to appear before the AO and explain the same.
What were the facts?
The assessee failed to file a return of income and did not comply with notices for assessment year 2010-11. The Assessing Officer made additions based on cash deposits and bank drafts purchased in cash, which were confirmed by the CIT(A) in an ex-parte order.
What were the issues?
Whether the additions made by the AO on account of unexplained cash deposits and bank drafts are sustainable without providing the assessee an opportunity to explain the same, especially considering the ex-parte nature of the orders.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. R.K PANDA
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the exparte order dated 25.10.2018 of the CIT(A)-11, New Delhi relating to A. Y. 2010-11.
Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee these all relate to the order of the CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.34,39,000/- made by the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 144/147 of the IT Act.
None appeared on behalf of the assesee. However, written synopsis was filed. Therefore, considering the fact that the assessee is a senior citizen of aged about 73 years and assessment order as well as appeal order were passed exparte this matter is being decided on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. DR.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that on the basis of information received through NMS that assessee has deposited cash of Rs.30,25,000/- in his Savings Bank account and had not filed return of income for the relevant assessment year, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the IT Act. The notice u/s. 148 was accordingly issued but there was no compliance to such notice. There was also no compliance to the statutory notices issued u/s. 142 (1). In absence of any reply from the side of the assessee to substantiate the source of cash deposits in the bank account and purchase of bank drafts in cash the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.30,25,000/- being the amount of cash deposits in the savings bank account and addition of Rs.4,14,000/- being the purchase of bank drafts in cash. Thus the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.34,39,000/-. Since despite number of opportunities granted none appeared on behalf of the assesee, the Ld. CIT(A) in the exparte order passed by him sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assesse is in appeal before the Tribunal.
I have perused the material available on record and heard the Ld. DR. It is an admitted fact that despite issue of notice u/s. 148 as well as notices u/s. 142 (1), the assessee neither filed the return of income nor filed the requisite details before the Assessing Officer to substantiate the cash deposits made in the bank account and purchase of bank drafts/ pay orders in cash. Therefore, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s. 144 of the IT Act by making addition of Rs.34,39,000/-. I find despite opportunities granted by the CIT(A) the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) for which the Ld. CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal for non prosecution.
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and considering the fact that the assessee is a senior citizen of aged about 73 years old, I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Assessing Officer and explain the source of the cash deposits made in the savings bank account and the purchase of pay order / demand drafts/ failing which the Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on 09.05.2019.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026