HUSHN JAHAN,AMETHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER AMETHI, AMETHI

ITA 68/ALLD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 November 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA (Judicial Member)9 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned a significant delay in filing the appeal, considering the assessee's illiteracy and lack of computer literacy. It found that the NFAC had passed an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the case to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, directing that the assessee be given another opportunity to present her case and produce evidence for the bank deposits.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income and failed to respond to a notice under section 142(1). The AO then obtained bank deposit details, finding Rs.16,50,000/- in cash deposits which the assessee could not explain, leading to its addition under section 69A. The AO also made an addition for business income by enhancing receipts and applying an 8% net profit rate, completing the assessment ex-parte under section 144. The NFAC partly allowed the appeal, sustaining the 69A addition but deleting the business income addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment was valid given the lack of proper notice and opportunity of being heard; whether the additions for unexplained cash deposits and business income under sections 69A and 144 were justified without proper examination of facts and evidence; and whether the AO had jurisdictional competence to issue the notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1),Section 133(6),Section 69A,Section 144,Section 115BE,Section 270A,Section 271AAC,Section 271B,Section 271F,Section 44AD,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, ALLAHABAD

Before: SHRI. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Singh, C.A

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 20.02.2024, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed the return of income for the year under consideration. The Income Tax Department issued notice under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’), requiring the assessee to prepare a true and correct return of income for the year under consideration. However, the assessee neither filed any return of income nor furnished any reply in response to the said notice. The AO, therefore, obtained the bank deposit details of the assessee from the State Bank of India, Jagdishpur Branch,

ITA No.68/ALLD/2025 Amethi under section 133(6) of the Act, as pe

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →