SANJUKTA VARANASI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), VISAKHAPATNAM

Thus, the delay in filing the appeal was due to the reasons explained above which were beyond the control of the appellant. The delay is neither intentional nor deliberate. Therefore, the appellant respectfully prays the hon'ble ITAT to kindly condone the said delay of 166 days in filing the appeal and to pass appropriate orders in the interest of rendering substantial justice.”

On perusal of the contents of the affidavit filed by the assessee and medical records as well as the submission of the Ld. AR, we find that the assessee is Page. No 2

Brief facts of the case are that, assessee during the demonetization period has made cash deposits into the bank account but has not filed any return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18. Hence, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued on 12.03.2018 requiring the assessee to file the return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18. Further a letter dated 15.05.2019 was addressed to the assessee to submit the copy of the return of income filed, if any. In response to the said notice assessee neither complied with the notice nor submitted the information called for. Considering the non-compliances by the assessee, the Ld. Assessing Officer [hereinafter in short “Ld. AO"] framed the assessment under section 144 of the Act by making addition of Rs. 80,46,495/- under section 69A of the Act.

On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Ld. AO since assessee has not responded to any of the notice / opportunities provided to the assessee.

On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal: -

The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.56,71,595 made by the assessing officer u/s. 69A of the Act towards unexplained credits in bank account of the appellant.

Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.”

Ground Nos. 1, 2 & 5 are general in nature and needs no adjudication.

Ground Nos. 3 & 4 are with respect to sustaining the addition of Rs.23,74,900/- as unexplained cash deposits and Rs.56,71,595/- as unexplained credits in the bank account under section 69A of the Act.

At the outset, Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without providing sufficient opportunities to the assessee. He further pleaded that the assessee could not respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). He therefore prayed for one final opportunity before Ld. CIT(A) to submit the relevant documents with respect to the cash deposits and credit entries in the bank statements.

Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] strongly objected to the plea of the Ld.AR and vehemently argued that the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) has provided ample opportunities to the assessee as Page. No 4

We have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has not fully complied with the notices before Ld. AO and has also not responded to the various notices issued to the assessee as detailed in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). In the interest of natural justice, considering the plea of the Ld.AR and considering the huge demand, we are of the considered view that assessee may be provided one final opportunity to substantiate the case before Ld. CIT(A). Needless to say, that the assessee should cooperate with the remand proceedings failing which the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to decide the case based on the material available on record. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are statistically allowed.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.