Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee did not file an income tax return for AY 2017-18. The AO, based on information from the ITBA portal, found cash deposits in the assessee's bank accounts during demonetization. Despite notices, the assessee failed to provide explanations or evidence for the source of these deposits, leading to the AO treating the entire cash deposit of Rs. 26,51,401/- as unexplained income under section 144 of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal noted the significant delay in filing the appeal (448 days) and the assessee's explanation citing lack of access to the registered email and a serious medical condition. The Tribunal condoned the delay, accepting the explanation as bonafide and in the interest of substantial justice. It also admitted additional evidence provided by the assessee related to the source of funds.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the additional evidence provided by the assessee should be admitted for deciding the appeal on merits.
Sections Cited
69A, 142(1), 144, 133(6), 131, 29
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY
ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 24.05.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2017-18, raising following grounds:
1. In the facts and 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law A.O. circumstances of the case and in law A.O. erred is adding sum of Rs. 26,51,401/ erred is adding sum of Rs. 26,51,401/- as unexplained money as unexplained money income within the meaning of under section 69 A of Act. income within the meaning of under section 69 A of Act. income within the meaning of under section 69 A of Act.
2. Reasons recorded by A.O. for adding sum of Rs.
2. Reasons recorded by A.O. for adding sum of Rs.
2. Reasons recorded by A.O. for adding sum of Rs. 26,51,401/- as unexplained money income within as unexplained money income within the meaning of u/s 69A of Act, are wrong insufficient and meaning of u/s 69A of Act, are wrong insufficient and meaning of u/s 69A of Act, are wrong insufficient and contrary to the facts and evidence on record. contrary to the facts and evidence on record.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee, an Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee, an Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, is engaged in the business of running a general store. individual, is engaged in the business of running a general store. individual, is engaged in the business of running a general store. For the assessment year under consideration, the assessee did not year under consideration, the assessee did not year under consideration, the assessee did not file any return of income. The Assessing Officer, on the basis of file any return of income. The Assessing Officer, on the basis of file any return of income. The Assessing Officer, on the basis of information available on the Income information available on the Income-tax Business Application tax Business Application (ITBA) module of the Income (ITBA) module of the Income-tax Portal, noticed that cash had been tax Portal, noticed that cash had been deposited in the bank accounts of the assessee during the he bank accounts of the assessee during the he bank accounts of the assessee during the demonetisation period. Accordingly, the case was taken up for demonetisation period. Accordingly, the case was taken up for demonetisation period. Accordingly, the case was taken up for enquiry and a notice under section 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, enquiry and a notice under section 142(1) of the Income enquiry and a notice under section 142(1) of the Income 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was issued calling upon 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was issued calling upon 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) was issued calling upon the assessee to explain the source of such cash deposits. xplain the source of such cash deposits. xplain the source of such cash deposits.
2.1 Subsequently, a notice requiring the assessee to file the return Subsequently, a notice requiring the assessee to file the return Subsequently, a notice requiring the assessee to file the return of income was also issued. However, the assessee failed to comply of income was also issued. However, the assessee failed to comply of income was also issued. However, the assessee failed to comply with the statutory notices. In the absence of any response, the with the statutory notices. In the absence of any response, the with the statutory notices. In the absence of any response, the Assessing Officer proposed to complete the assessment under r proposed to complete the assessment under r proposed to complete the assessment under section 144 of the Act. For the purpose of verification, the Assessing section 144 of the Act. For the purpose of verification, the Assessing section 144 of the Act. For the purpose of verification, the Assessing Officer obtained copies of the bank statements directly from Axis Officer obtained copies of the bank statements directly from Axis Officer obtained copies of the bank statements directly from Axis Bank Ltd. and Oriental Bank of Commerce by exercising powers Bank Ltd. and Oriental Bank of Commerce by exercising powers Bank Ltd. and Oriental Bank of Commerce by exercising powers under section 133(6) of the Act. 133(6) of the Act.
On examination of the bank statements, the Assessing Officer On examination of the bank statements, the Assessing Officer On examination of the bank statements, the Assessing Officer observed that cash aggregating to ₹26,51,401/– had been deposited observed that cash aggregating to had been deposited in the bank accounts of the assessee during the relevant previous in the bank accounts of the assessee during the relevant previous in the bank accounts of the assessee during the relevant previous year. Out of this, a sum of ₹14,00,000/– was deposited during the year. Out of this, a sum of was deposited during the demonetisation period, while the balance pertained to deposits demonetisation period, while the balance pertained to deposits demonetisation period, while the balance pertained to deposits made outside the demonetisation period, along with other credits. made outside the demonetisation period, along with other credits. made outside the demonetisation period, along with other credits. The Assessing Officer recorded the following details: The Assessing Officer recorded the following details:
Account No. Name of Account Account Acctt. Type Cash Cash Total Cash Total Cash Other Total Credits the Bank Holder deposits Deposits During the During the Credits (Rs.) (Rs.) from (Rs.) from Year (Rs.) (Rs.) 01.04.2016 09.11.20 to 16 to 08.11.2016 31.12.20 16 9090100336289 Axis Kesaram Kesaram SB 0 8,01,000 8,01,000 7,00,000 15,01,000 Bank Choudhary Choudhary Ltd. 16191011001375 OBC Ambika Dry Ambika Dry CA 5,10,000 5,99,000 11,09,000 41,401 11,50,401 (reported as No. fruits and fruits and 1619101100137) Stationery Stationery General General Store Total 5,10,000 14,00,0 19,10,000 19,10,000 7,41,401 26,51,401 00 2.2 From the above table, it is gathered that the assessee has deposited cash of From the above table, it is gathered that the assessee has deposited cash of From the above table, it is gathered that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs. 14,00,000/- in bank account maintained with Axis Bank Ltd. and Oriental Bank of in bank account maintained with Axis Bank Ltd. and Oriental Bank of in bank account maintained with Axis Bank Ltd. and Oriental Bank of Commerce during the period of demonetization. Further, assessee has also deposited Commerce during the period of demonetization. Further, assessee has also deposited Commerce during the period of demonetization. Further, assessee has also deposited cash of Rs. 5,10,000/ 5,10,000/- other than the period of demonetisation in his accounts amounting other than the period of demonetisation in his accounts amounting and there are other credits to the tune of Rs. 7,41,401/- (Total Credit (Total Credit- Rs. 26,51,401/- and there are other credits to the tune of ). 3.1 The Assessing Officer thereafter issued summons under The Assessing Officer thereafter issued summons under The Assessing Officer thereafter issued summons under section 131 of the Act and r section 131 of the Act and recorded the statement of the assessee. ecorded the statement of the assessee. The Assessing Officer has noted in impugned assessment order that The Assessing Officer has noted in impugned assessment order that The Assessing Officer has noted in impugned assessment order that the assessee failed to furnish any documentary evidence to the assessee failed to furnish any documentary evidence to the assessee failed to furnish any documentary evidence to substantiate the source of the cash deposits. In the absence of any substantiate the source of the cash deposits. In the absence of any substantiate the source of the cash deposits. In the absence of any satisfactory explanation satisfactory explanation and supporting material, the Assessing and supporting material, the Assessing
Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Officer completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act and Officer completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act and Officer completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act and treated the entire cash deposits of ₹26,51,401/– as unexplained, treated the entire cash deposits of as unexplained, bringing the same to tax. bringing the same to tax.
In appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income In appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income In appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the assessee again failed to comply with the notices (Appeals), the assessee again failed to comply with the notices (Appeals), the assessee again failed to comply with the notices issued. Consequently, the learned CIT(A) proceeded to dispose of issued. Consequently, the learned CIT(A) proceeded to dispose of issued. Consequently, the learned CIT(A) proceeded to dispose of the appeal ex parte and sustained the assessment. the appeal ex parte and sustained the assessment.
Aggrieved by the ex parte order of the learned CIT(A), the Aggrieved by the ex parte order of the learned CIT(A), the Aggrieved by the ex parte order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal, raising the grounds in appeal before the Tribunal, raising the grounds in appeal before the Tribunal, raising the grounds of appeal as reproduced hereinabove. of appeal as reproduced hereinabove.
At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 448 days in filing the present appeal. It was that there is a delay of 448 days in filing the present appeal. It was that there is a delay of 448 days in filing the present appeal. It was pointed out that the impugned pointed out that the impugned order of the learned Commissioner order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was passed on 24.05.2024 and, therefore, tax (Appeals) was passed on 24.05.2024 and, therefore, tax (Appeals) was passed on 24.05.2024 and, therefore, the appeal before the Tribunal was required to be filed within the the appeal before the Tribunal was required to be filed within the the appeal before the Tribunal was required to be filed within the statutory period of 60 days, i.e., on or before 23.07.2024. However, statutory period of 60 days, i.e., on or before 23.07.2024. However, statutory period of 60 days, i.e., on or before 23.07.2024. However, the appeal has been f the appeal has been filed on 14.10.2025, resulting in a delay of 448 iled on 14.10.2025, resulting in a delay of 448 days.
6.1 The learned counsel drew our attention to the affidavit sworn The learned counsel drew our attention to the affidavit sworn The learned counsel drew our attention to the affidavit sworn by the assessee and submitted that the delay occurred primarily by the assessee and submitted that the delay occurred primarily by the assessee and submitted that the delay occurred primarily due to lack of access to the e due to lack of access to the e-mail address registered on the mail address registered on the Income-tax Portal, which belonged to the earlier tax consultant, Portal, which belonged to the earlier tax consultant, Portal, which belonged to the earlier tax consultant,
Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary coupled with the medical condition of the assessee. It was coupled with the medical condition of the assessee. It was coupled with the medical condition of the assessee. It was submitted that the assessee has a strong case on merits, that there submitted that the assessee has a strong case on merits, that there submitted that the assessee has a strong case on merits, that there was no mala fide intention or deliberate negligence on his part, and was no mala fide intention or deliberate negligence on his part, and was no mala fide intention or deliberate negligence on his part, and that the delay was wholly unintentional. It was therefore prayed the delay was wholly unintentional. It was therefore prayed the delay was wholly unintentional. It was therefore prayed that, in the interest of substantial justice, the delay may be that, in the interest of substantial justice, the delay may be that, in the interest of substantial justice, the delay may be condoned.
6.2 We have heard the rival submissions on the issue of We have heard the rival submissions on the issue of We have heard the rival submissions on the issue of condonation of delay. The assessee has filed a detailed affidavit condonation of delay. The assessee has filed a detailed affidavit condonation of delay. The assessee has filed a detailed affidavit explaining the circumstances leading to the delay. The material xplaining the circumstances leading to the delay. The material xplaining the circumstances leading to the delay. The material contents of the affidavit, in substance, disclose that the assessee is contents of the affidavit, in substance, disclose that the assessee is contents of the affidavit, in substance, disclose that the assessee is an individual of limited means and education, who was not an individual of limited means and education, who was not an individual of limited means and education, who was not conversant with the procedural requirements under the Act. The conversant with the procedural requirements under the Act. The conversant with the procedural requirements under the Act. The affidavit further explains that the assessee’s PAN was registered on ffidavit further explains that the assessee’s PAN was registered on ffidavit further explains that the assessee’s PAN was registered on the Income-tax Portal by a tax consultant, who, for the purpose of tax Portal by a tax consultant, who, for the purpose of tax Portal by a tax consultant, who, for the purpose of communication, had mentioned his own e communication, had mentioned his own e-mail address and mobile mail address and mobile numbers. Consequently, all electronic notices issued by the learned numbers. Consequently, all electronic notices issued by th numbers. Consequently, all electronic notices issued by th CIT(A) were served on the consultant and never came to the CIT(A) were served on the consultant and never came to the CIT(A) were served on the consultant and never came to the knowledge of the assessee. Due to non knowledge of the assessee. Due to non-filing of submissions, the filing of submissions, the appeal before the CIT(A) came to be dismissed ex parte. appeal before the CIT(A) came to be dismissed ex parte. appeal before the CIT(A) came to be dismissed ex parte.
6.3 The affidavit further reveals that the assessee became aware o The affidavit further reveals that the assessee became aware o The affidavit further reveals that the assessee became aware of the dismissal of his appeal only upon receipt of a recovery notice in the dismissal of his appeal only upon receipt of a recovery notice in the dismissal of his appeal only upon receipt of a recovery notice in August 2025. Thereafter, despite diligent efforts, the assessee could August 2025. Thereafter, despite diligent efforts, the assessee could August 2025. Thereafter, despite diligent efforts, the assessee could not trace the earlier consultant and was constrained to approach not trace the earlier consultant and was constrained to approach not trace the earlier consultant and was constrained to approach
Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary another professional, who advised him to file the another professional, who advised him to file the present appeal along with an application for condonation of delay. The affidavit along with an application for condonation of delay. The affidavit along with an application for condonation of delay. The affidavit also states that the assessee is suffering from a serious medical also states that the assessee is suffering from a serious medical also states that the assessee is suffering from a serious medical condition and is undergoing continuous treatment, which further condition and is undergoing continuous treatment, which further condition and is undergoing continuous treatment, which further contributed to the delay. It has been catego contributed to the delay. It has been categorically asserted that the rically asserted that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate, but occurred due to delay was neither intentional nor deliberate, but occurred due to delay was neither intentional nor deliberate, but occurred due to circumstances beyond the assessee’s control. circumstances beyond the assessee’s control.
6.4 Having perused the sworn affidavit and considering the Having perused the sworn affidavit and considering the Having perused the sworn affidavit and considering the explanation offered therein, we are satisfied that the assessee was explanation offered therein, we are satisfied that the asses explanation offered therein, we are satisfied that the asses prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed period. It is well settled that the expression “sufficient prescribed period. It is well settled that the expression “sufficient prescribed period. It is well settled that the expression “sufficient cause” should receive a liberal construction so as to advance cause” should receive a liberal construction so as to advance cause” should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice, particularly when the delay is substantial justice, particularly when the delay is not attributable not attributable to any mala fide conduct or deliberate inaction. The explanation to any mala fide conduct or deliberate inaction. The explanation to any mala fide conduct or deliberate inaction. The explanation furnished by the assessee appears to be bona fide, plausible, and furnished by the assessee appears to be bona fide, plausible, and furnished by the assessee appears to be bona fide, plausible, and supported by circumstances on record. supported by circumstances on record.
6.5 In matters of condonation of delay, the courts and tribunals In matters of condonation of delay, the courts and tribunals In matters of condonation of delay, the courts and tribunals have consistently held that a litigant should not be thrown out of consistently held that a litigant should not be thrown out of consistently held that a litigant should not be thrown out of court on technical grounds when substantial justice demands court on technical grounds when substantial justice demands court on technical grounds when substantial justice demands adjudication on merits. In the present case, the delay has been adjudication on merits. In the present case, the delay has been adjudication on merits. In the present case, the delay has been adequately explained, and no prejudice is caused to the Revenue by adequately explained, and no prejudice is caused to the Revenue by adequately explained, and no prejudice is caused to the Revenue by condoning the same.
Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary 6.6 Accordingly, we condone the delay of 448 days in filing the Accordingly, we condone the delay of 448 days in filing the Accordingly, we condone the delay of 448 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits.
Having carefully considered the submissions of the assessee Having carefully considered the submissions of the assessee Having carefully considered the submissions of the assessee and the orders of the lower authorities, we find that the learned and the orders of the lower authorities, we find that th and the orders of the lower authorities, we find that th Commissioner of Income Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal primarily on the ground of non primarily on the ground of non-compliance by the assessee. The compliance by the assessee. The relevant observations of the learned CIT(A) are reproduced relevant observations of the learned CIT(A) are reproduced relevant observations of the learned CIT(A) are reproduced hereunder:
“4.1 The appeal was filed by the assessee on “4.1 The appeal was filed by the assessee on “4.1 The appeal was filed by the assessee on 21.11.2019 against order u/s 144 of the Act dated 01.10.2019 for the AY: against order u/s 144 of the Act dated 01.10.2019 for the AY: against order u/s 144 of the Act dated 01.10.2019 for the AY: 2017-18. In connection to the appeal, opportunities were 18. In connection to the appeal, opportunities were 18. In connection to the appeal, opportunities were provided to the appellant to substantiate his grounds of appeal provided to the appellant to substantiate his grounds of appeal provided to the appellant to substantiate his grounds of appeal on or before the following dates: on or before the following dates: 1) 19.01.2024 1) 19.01.2024 2) 14.05.2024 2) 14.05.2024 3) 22.05.2024 3) 22.05.2024 On verification of the ITBA portal, it is observed that all the On verification of the ITBA portal, it is observed that all the On verification of the ITBA portal, it is observed that all the notices notices notices got got got successfully successfully successfully delivered delivered delivered to to to email: email: email: taxvashi189@gmail.com & bhadras39@yahoo.com. Against all taxvashi189@gmail.com & bhadras39@yahoo.com. Against all taxvashi189@gmail.com & bhadras39@yahoo.com. Against all these notices, appellant is not interested in filing any details these notices, appellant is not interested in filing any details these notices, appellant is not interested in filing any details during the during the appellate proceedings and avail the opportunity appellate proceedings and avail the opportunity under the principle of natural justice. In response to the notices under the principle of natural justice. In response to the notices under the principle of natural justice. In response to the notices issued, even adjournment was not sought. In such situation, issued, even adjournment was not sought. In such situation, issued, even adjournment was not sought. In such situation, the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the appellant is the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the appellant is the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the appellant is not interested in not interested in pursuing the appeal. 4.2 It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case 4.2 It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case 4.2 It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N.Bhattacharjee and another (118 ITR 461) that appeal of B.N.Bhattacharjee and another (118 ITR 461) that appeal of B.N.Bhattacharjee and another (118 ITR 461) that appeal does not mean merely filing of memo of appeal but also does not mean merely filing of memo of appeal but also does not mean merely filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively. In cases where the appellant does pursuing it effectively. In cases where the appellant does pursuing it effectively. In cases where the appellant does not want to pursue the appeal, appellate authorities have inherent want to pursue the appeal, appellate authorities have inherent want to pursue the appeal, appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss the appeal for non power to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution as held by the prosecution as held by the Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary
Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol vs. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol vs. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009. While deciding Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009. While deciding Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009. While deciding the issue, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has referred to the issue, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has referred to the issue, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has referred to the observations of Hidayatullah, Chief Justice (as His Lordship observations of Hidayatullah, Chief Justice (as His Lordship observations of Hidayatullah, Chief Justice (as His Lordship then then then was) was) was) in in in Sunderlal Sunderlal Sunderlal Mannalal Mannalal Mannalal Vs. Vs. Vs. Nandramdas Nandramdas Nandramdas Dwarakadas AIR 1958 MP 260 wherein it was observed: Dwarakadas AIR 1958 MP 260 wherein it was observed: Dwarakadas AIR 1958 MP 260 wherein it was observed: "Now the Act does not give any powe "Now the Act does not give any power of dismissal. But it is r of dismissal. But it is axiomatic that no court or tribunal is supposed to continue a axiomatic that no court or tribunal is supposed to continue a axiomatic that no court or tribunal is supposed to continue a proceeding before it when the party who has moved it has not proceeding before it when the party who has moved it has not proceeding before it when the party who has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, is an inherent power which every tribunal p is an inherent power which every tribunal possesses. ossesses. 4.3 This appeal has been filed by the appellant with a prayer to 4.3 This appeal has been filed by the appellant with a prayer to 4.3 This appeal has been filed by the appellant with a prayer to this office that the additions made by the AO be deleted. In this office that the additions made by the AO be deleted. In this office that the additions made by the AO be deleted. In such situation, it is for the appellant to furnish submissions such situation, it is for the appellant to furnish submissions such situation, it is for the appellant to furnish submissions with relevant evidence(s), case laws, if any, to support with relevant evidence(s), case laws, if any, to support with relevant evidence(s), case laws, if any, to support the claim. The burden of proof is always on the person who has claim. The burden of proof is always on the person who has claim. The burden of proof is always on the person who has made the claim by filing the appeal. Further, if the appellant made the claim by filing the appeal. Further, if the appellant made the claim by filing the appeal. Further, if the appellant claims that the addition made should be deleted, the burden is claims that the addition made should be deleted, the burden is claims that the addition made should be deleted, the burden is on the appellant to prove it why it should be deleted. Same is on the appellant to prove it why it should be deleted. Same is on the appellant to prove it why it should be deleted. Same is the position in case of all allowances, deduction, exemptions, position in case of all allowances, deduction, exemptions, position in case of all allowances, deduction, exemptions, claims or loss etc. Since an appeal is nothing but the claim of claims or loss etc. Since an appeal is nothing but the claim of claims or loss etc. Since an appeal is nothing but the claim of the appellant that he has been unduly unjustifiably taxed or the appellant that he has been unduly unjustifiably taxed or the appellant that he has been unduly unjustifiably taxed or levied fee/interest, it is for the levied fee/interest, it is for theappellant to prove its case. The appellant to prove its case. The appellant has not availed any opportunity to do so. lant has not availed any opportunity to do so. lant has not availed any opportunity to do so. From the conduct of the appellant as per the facts noted above, From the conduct of the appellant as per the facts noted above, From the conduct of the appellant as per the facts noted above, it is clear that the appellant does not wish to pursue the appeal. it is clear that the appellant does not wish to pursue the appeal. it is clear that the appellant does not wish to pursue the appeal. Even otherwise on the merits of it also, I do not see any reason Even otherwise on the merits of it also, I do not see any reason Even otherwise on the merits of it also, I do not see any reason to differ with the findings of the AO since no attempt has been h the findings of the AO since no attempt has been h the findings of the AO since no attempt has been made by the assessee to discharge its onus. Hence, made by the assessee to discharge its onus. Hence, made by the assessee to discharge its onus. Hence, respectfully respectfully respectfully following following following the the the above above above mentioned mentioned mentioned judicial judicial judicial pronouncements and in view of the facts of the case, the appeal pronouncements and in view of the facts of the case, the appeal pronouncements and in view of the facts of the case, the appeal is hereby dismissed.” is hereby dismissed.” 7.1 Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee filed an he learned counsel for the assessee filed an he learned counsel for the assessee filed an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the Income-tax Rules, 1963, and prayed that the following tax Rules, 1963, and prayed that the following tax Rules, 1963, and prayed that the following documents be taken on record: documents be taken on record:
Sr No. Particulars Page No. 1 Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father in law dated 27.01.2020 Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father in law dated 27.01.2020 1 - 4 with respect to cash gift received Rs. 3,00,000/- on 20.05.2016 with respect to cash gift received Rs. 3,00,000/ on 20.05.2016 2 Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father dated 27.01.2020 with Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father dated 27.01.2020 with Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father dated 27.01.2020 with 5 - 7 respect to cash gift received totalling to Rs. 3,00,000/- on respect to cash gift received totalling to Rs. 3,00,000/ 27.07.2016 3 Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father dated 27.01.2020 with Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father dated 27.01.2020 with Copy of Notarised Gift Deed from father dated 27.01.2020 with 8 - 10 respect to cash gift received totalling to Rs. 3,00,000/- on respect to cash gift received totalling to Rs. 3,00,000/ 05.09.2016 4 Copy of Land Record of father in law evidencing capacity of Copy of Land Record of father in law evidencing capacity of Copy of Land Record of father in law evidencing capacity of 11 - 12 generating agriculture income generating agriculture income 5 Copy of Land Record of father evidencing capacity of generating Land Record of father evidencing capacity of generating Land Record of father evidencing capacity of generating 13 agriculture income agriculture income 6 Copy of Axis Bank statements for the FY 2016-17 Copy of Axis Bank statements for the FY 2016 14 - 16 7 Copy of Oriental Bank statement for the FY 2016-17 Copy of Oriental Bank statement for the FY 2016 17 - 18 8 Medical documents in support of illness 'Acquired Medical documents in support of illness 'Acquired 19 - 27 Immunodeficiency Syndrome' (AIDS) suffered by the Assessee Immunodeficiency Syndrome' (AIDS) suffered by the Assessee Immunodeficiency Syndrome' (AIDS) suffered by the Assessee 7.2 Upon due consideration, we find that the additional evidence Upon due consideration, we find that the additional evidence Upon due consideration, we find that the additional evidence sought to be produced by the assessee directly goes to the root of sought to be produced by the assessee directly goes to the root of sought to be produced by the assessee directly goes to the root of the controversy, namely, the explanation of the source of cash the controversy, namely, the explanation of the source the controversy, namely, the explanation of the source deposits in the bank accounts. The assessee has explained that deposits in the bank accounts. The assessee has explained that deposits in the bank accounts. The assessee has explained that these these these documents documents documents could could could not not not be be be produced produced produced earlier earlier earlier due due due to to to circumstances beyond his control, including lack of proper circumstances beyond his control, including lack of proper circumstances beyond his control, including lack of proper communication and serious medical condition. In the interest of communication and serious medical condition. In the interest of communication and serious medical condition. In the interest of substantial justice, and in order to ensure that the matter is al justice, and in order to ensure that the matter is al justice, and in order to ensure that the matter is decided on merits rather than on technicalities, we deem it decided on merits rather than on technicalities, we deem it decided on merits rather than on technicalities, we deem it appropriate to admit the additional evidence. appropriate to admit the additional evidence.
7.3 Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside, and the matter is restor aside, and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, ed to the file of the Assessing Officer, who shall examine the additional evidence, afford reasonable who shall examine the additional evidence, afford reasonable who shall examine the additional evidence, afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, and decide the issue opportunity of being heard to the assessee, and decide the issue opportunity of being heard to the assessee, and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. afresh in accordance with law.
Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary Kesaram Chatararamji Coudhary 7.4 The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical The grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on ounced in the open Court on 23/01/2026. /01/2026.