Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, engaged in retail trading, did not file his ITR for AY 2017-18. Information led to the Assessing Officer reopening the assessment and completing it ex-parte under sections 147 and 144, treating a cash deposit of Rs.1,42,79,000/- as unexplained under section 69A. The Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC subsequently dismissed the assessee's appeal in limine due to a 143-day delay in filing and the absence of a condonation application or affidavit.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal solely due to the delay in filing and the lack of a condonation application. Considering the assessee's plea for an opportunity to present details for both the cash deposit source and the delay, and in the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to grant one opportunity to the assessee to file the requisite documents and decide the issue as per law.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine due to a delay in filing without a condonation application, and whether the cash deposit of Rs.1,42,79,000/- can be treated as unexplained money under section 69A.
Sections Cited
69A, 139, 147, 148, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex-parte order dated 24.09.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2017-18.
Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in treating the cash deposit of Rs.1,42,79,000/- in the bank account as unexplained deposits u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of retail trading of agriculture and animal husbandry services in the name of his proprietary concern M/s. Mauli Enterprises. He has not filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year within the time limit as per provisions of section 139 of the Act. Information was available with the Assessing Officer that the assessee has made cash deposit of Rs.1,42,79,000/- in the bank account during the year. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer after recording reasons, reopened the assessment u/s 147 of the Act and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 18.03.2021. Despite a number of opportunities granted, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. The Assessing Officer, therefore, completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,42,79,000/-.
Since there was a delay of 143 days in filing of the appeal and there was no application for condonation of such delay nor any explanation or affidavit filed to justify such delay, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudication on merit.
Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessee is an individual and is not well versed with the income tax proceedings. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to file the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC for condonation of delay as well as explanation regarding source of such cash deposit.
The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.
We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that due to non-submission of any details before the Assessing Officer, he completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act determining the total cash deposit of Rs.1,42,79,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Since there was delay in filing of the appeal by 143 days, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal for want of condonation application along with affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC along with the application for condonation of delay as well as affidavit. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to grant one opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case by filing the requisite documents substantiating the source of cash deposit as well as the delay in filing of the appeal and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th January, 2026.