Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual trader, faced an assessment u/s 144 for unexplained cash deposits (₹76,25,650/-) during demonetization and failure to file an Income Tax Return, with prior non-compliance to a notice u/s 142(1). The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to further non-compliance, leading the assessee to file an appeal before the ITAT with a 269-day delay, citing late knowledge of the CIT(A) order.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 269-day delay in filing the appeal, finding the reason genuine and unopposed by the Revenue. In the interest of justice, and noting the non-compliance at lower stages, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, directing the assessee to present all documentary evidence and the AO to pass a fresh order after hearing.
Key Issues
1. Condonation of a 269-day delay in filing the appeal. 2. Whether to remit the assessment back to the AO for fresh consideration with an opportunity for the assessee to present evidence, given the ex-parte assessment and dismissal by lower authorities.
Sections Cited
Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 271AAC(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `Patna BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
(Assessment Year: 2017-18) Om Prakash Sha ITO , Ward 2(4) S/o Sarayug Saw, Karay Biharsharif Vs. Parsurai, Nalanda, Bihar-801304 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. DFYPS6484C Assessee by : Shri A.K. Rastogi, AR Revenue by : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR Date of hearing: 07.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 18.07.2025 O R D E R Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(E)”] dated 23.03.2024 for A.Y. 2017-18.
It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 269 days for this the assessee has filed condonation petition, which are as follows-
“The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna Reference: Om Prakash Sha, Sto Sarayug Saw, Karay Parsurai, Nalanda 801304, Bihar [PAN: DFYPS6484C] for A.Y. 2017-18 Subject: Petition for condonation of delay in filing appeal. Reference: Order of CIT(A), NFAC dated 23/03/2024.
Om Prakash Sha; A.Y. 2017-18 Sir, The Ld. CIT(A) has passed order in Appeal No. CIT(A),Patna- 1/11369/2019-20 on 23/03/2024. It is stated that on 27/01/2025, the appellant has received hard copy of show cause notice u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act, from the office of Income Tax Officer. VU-1(2)(3), Muzaffarpur (stationed at Patna) through Speed Post. Thereafter, on browsing of e- portal the appellant has found the impugned order dismissing the appeal on 23/03/2024 under the tab "For Your Information" whereas normally the orders are uploaded under the tab 'For your action'. There was no communication of uploading of this order either on the registered email or registered mobile no. Thus, the appellant came to know about the adverse order of Ld. CIT(A) only on 27/01/2025. Accordingly, the appellant is filing this appeal which can be said to be a belated appeal, if limitation is counted from the date of its order. However, it is stated that the impugned order came to the knowledge of the appellant on 27/01/2025 and therefore, according to the appellant, the present appeal is not a belated appeal. However, without entering into controversy, it is respectfully submitted that delay, if any, may kindly be condoned and the appeal may kindly be heard on merits.
Submitted”
On perusal of the condonation petition, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. DR did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncement that the case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay is hereby condoned.
The brief fact of the case of the assessee is that the assessee is an individual deriving income from trading of sweets, mixtures, handmade bakery biscuits, etc. The assessment order has been passed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) on the ground that there has been Om Prakash Sha; A.Y. 2017-18 deposit of cash in bank during the demonetization period amounting to ₹12,84,250/-. The AO in the assessment proceeding has also noted that there has been a total deposit of ₹76,25,650/- in the bank account of the assessee and assessee did not file return of income. Therefore, the source of cash deposit remains unexplained. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee but there was no compliance, as a result of which the assessment was done by making an addition of ₹76,25,650/-, to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved by the said order the assessee preferred the appeal before the ld. CIT (A), wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as further there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee has preferred the appeal before us.
The ld. AR instead of arguing into the merits of the case only prayed that the appeal of the assessee may be remitted back to the file of the ld. AO after giving an opportunity to the assessee to place all the documentary evidences essential to prove his case.
The ld. DR did raise any objection for the same.
Upon hearing the submission of the Counsel of the respected parties, and on perusal of the order of lower authorities there is no denying to this fact that order passed by both the authorities when there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee. The prayer of the assessee is that the assessee has to give an opportunity to place his case before the ld. AO. Keeping in view the submission, considering the order passed by the ld. lower authorities and for the interest of justice, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the ld. AO for fresh consideration. The assessee is directed to place all the documentary
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.07.2025.