SRI SANJIT KUMAR GIRI,MAYURBHANJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARIPADA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal considered the rival submissions and observed that the CIT(A) confirmed the addition due to non-representation by the assessee. Since the assessee requested another opportunity to present the case with documentary evidence, the issues were restored to the AO for readjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal ex-parte. The Assessing Officer (AO) had added the entire cash deposit of Rs.17,96,812/- under Section 69A of the Act due to non-furnishing of supporting details by the assessee during assessment proceedings.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition of cash deposit without proper explanation is justified and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Sri Sanjit Kumar Giri, Hijili, Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bangriposi, Dist: Mayurbhanj Baripada PAN No. : BJYPG 3736 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Somnath Sahu, ADV राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 3 /12/2025 : 3 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 25.8.2025 passed by ld CIT(A). NFAC, in Appeal No.NFAC/2012-13/10128163 for the assessment year 2013-14.
Shri Somnath Sahu, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer has passed the order u/s.143(3)/147 of the Act. It was the submission that the matter be restored to the file of the AO for adjudication afresh as the details could not be furnished before the AO.
2 4. In reply, ld Sr DR supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. As per the assessment order, there was total cash deposit of Rs.17,96,812/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO required the assessee to offer supporting details/documents/evidence to explain the nature of cash deposit. Since, no details were furnished by the assessee during the assessment proceedings to explain the nature and source of cash deposit of rs.17,96,812/-, made in the bank account, the Assessing Officer has added the entire cash deposit of Rs.17,96,812/- u/s.69A of the Act. On appeal, ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition due to non-representation by the assessee. As ld AR has requested to give one more opportunity to represent the case with documentary evidence, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication subject to cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to be paid ITAT Bar Association, Cuttack and the receipt of the payment be furnished before the AO before adjudication of the issues. The AO is directed to verify the nature and source of cash deposit and redecide the issue after allowing opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the AO without fail.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 3/12/2025. (राजेश कुमार) (जाज" माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सद"य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य / JUDICIAL MEMBER "दनांक Dated 3/12/2025 B.K.Parida, Sr.P.S(OS)
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026