Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 294 days due to health issues. The appeal challenges the CIT(A)'s order which confirmed the Assessing Officer's (AO) addition of Rs. 49,80,700/- as unexplained cash deposits, treating them as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding that the assessee had a reasonable cause. The Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the matter back to the AO to provide the assessee with another opportunity to present their case and explain the source of the deposits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to explain the source of cash deposits.
Sections Cited
250, 144, 68, 115BBE, 251(1)(a)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 dated 25.07.2024. 1.1 The Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation in filing the appeal by 294 days. However, the assessee has filed an affidavit before the ITAT dated 15th July, 2025 requested for condonation of delay of 294 days by mentioning that he has been struggling with health issues and was advised complete bed rest by the attending physician. He has also stated in the affidavit that he was unable to attend to his business and legal responsibilities, which
For that the NFAC erred in confirming the assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Vaishali, ('the Ld. AO’), assessing the appellant under section 144 of the Act, vide order dated 27-12-2019 at an income of Rs 55,04,960/- against the returned income of Rs. 5,24,260/-, which is wrong, Illegal and unjustified.
For that the learned NFAC has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the action of the AO in making addition of Rs 49,80,700/- on account of alleged unexplained cash deposited in the bank account under section 68 of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified.
For that the learned NFAC has erred in the facts and circumstances of the case in not resorting to the newly inserted section 251(1)(a) of the Act by not remanding back the matter to the assessing officer, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified.