DUTTA ENTERPRISE,DIGBOI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, DIGBOI, DIGBOI

PDF

ITA 279/GTY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati12 June 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: the Hon'ble ITAT was required to be filed by 24/12/2023. Therefore, the current appeal is being filed before the Hon'ble ITAT after a delay of 353 days.2. However, the delay in the filing of the appeal neither not due to any mala- fide intentions nor the appellant is in a position to gain an advantage due to the delay. The delay was purely due to severe medical conditions and circumstances beyond the control of the appellant which are being stated in the following points.3. The appellant is12 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The assessee, a firm, did not file an income tax return for AY 2017-18, leading to a best judgment assessment u/s 147 read with 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment included additions for unexplained cash deposit u/s 69A, unexplained cash withdrawal u/s 69C, and business income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-compliance, prompting the assessee to file a delayed appeal to the ITAT, citing severe medical conditions for the 353-day delay.

Held

The Tribunal condoned the 353-day delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause due to the assessee's medical conditions. On the merits, the Tribunal noted that the best judgment assessment by the AO was made without proper opportunity to the assessee and included arbitrary additions of both cash deposits and withdrawals. Citing Supreme Court precedents on fair best judgment assessments, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and AO, remanding the matter for a de novo assessment with a fresh opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

Key Issues

The key legal issues were the condonation of a 353-day delay in filing the appeal due to the assessee's medical condition, and the validity of a best judgment assessment that included arbitrary additions for unexplained cash deposits and withdrawals without providing the assessee a proper opportunity to be heard.

Sections Cited

Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 234A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 51 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2017-18 dated 25.10.2023, I.T.A. No.: 279/GTY/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Dutta Enterprise. which has been passed against the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Act, dated 25.03.2022. 1. 1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 353 days. An affidavit along with an application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee. The contents of the condonation petition are as under: “With reference to the communication sent by the