KADUBAI ASARAM DALVI @ ANITA BHASKAR BANKAR,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), AURANGABAD

आदेश / ORDER

“3. I states that, said appeal is well within the prescribed period of limitation from the date of knowledge of the order to me. However, if period is counted from the date of order, the delay of about 365 days seems to be caused for filing the appeal.

4. I states that, the order under appeal is an ex-parte order, since there has no opportunity of hearing to me before the learned CIT so Kadubai Asaram Dalvi @ Anita Bhaskar Bankar called and referred notices in the body of order by the learned CIT has not received to me, therefore I could not respond these notices and ultimately the learned CIT has been pleased to pass impugned order assuming that appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal.

5. I states that, the order under appeal, though has been passed on 24/07/2024, I have not received the order till this date. However, when I approached my advisor for filing Income Tax Return for AY 2025-26 i.e. on 05/09/2025 out of curiosity seen the status of appeal and that day I learnt that, appeal before learned CIT has already been decided and order U/s. 250 has been passed on 24/07/2024 itself.

6. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me and return of income for A.Y.2017-18 filed on 24.03.2018 declaring income of ₹3,52,290. Case selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for the reason cash deposit during the demonetization period. Valid statutory notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act duly served upon the assessee. Assessee filed details of the amounts withdrawn by her in F.Y.2010-11 and F.Y. 2016-17 and also gave reasons for such withdrawal. However, on the subsequent dates of hearing, assessee failed to appear resulting into passing of the best judgment assessment u/s.144 of the Act and ld. AO has made the addition for ₹10.10 lakh for unexplained money u/s.69 of the Act. Ld. AO has also taken note of the CBDT Circular applicable for the Senior Citizens with regard to the demonetization scheme. Even though assessee has preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but in absence of filing any written submissions/response the appeal has been dismissed. I also observe that few of the notices were issued by ld.CIT(A) during covid-19 pandemic restrictions. Under these given facts and circumstances and also considering the submissions filed by the assessee before both the lower authorities providing the details about the amounts withdrawn from the bank accounts/credits from past many years and also Kadubai Asaram Dalvi @ Anita Bhaskar Bankar assessee being a senior citizen, I deem it appropriate to remit the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.JAO in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 19th day of January, 2026.