MASTER GENERAL STORE PROP MOHAMMAD FAROOQ BHAT MAHARAJA BAZAR SRINAGAR J AND K,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2 SRINAGAR INCOME TAX OFFICE DHARMARTH TRUST BUILDING BARBAR SHAH SRINAGAR, SRINAGAR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per: Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Id. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, passed u/s 250 of the Act, 1961 vide order dated 24.11.2023 which has emanated from the order of AO, Ward-2, Srinagar, passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144 of the Act, vide order dated 19.12.2019. 2. Condonation of Delay: It is pointed out by the Registry that the appeal is filed belatedly by 458 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay on the ground that the appeal order dated 24.11.2023 should have been appealed within 60 days but the said order has not been served or issued to e-mail id of the assessee.
1 He further submitted that the said order has been e-mailed to his earlier counsel Mr. Mir Mustaq in the following e-mail ids mir.mustaq74@yahoo.com, mehranwani@yahoo.co.in. He further stated that the said counsel has never informed the assessee regarding the disposal of appeal by the first appellate authority and as such, the assessee was not at all aware of the same. Subsequently, he was informed by newly appointed counsel CA Zuahib Ashraf regarding the disposal of appeal ex parte. Subsequently, the assessee with the help of the newly appointed counsel has filed this appeal belated by 458 days, which has been caused not due to neglect and there has not been wilful default on the part of the assessee.
2 Considering the circumstances and due to the reasons contained in the affidavit filed, he prayed for condonation of delay. The Id. DR objected to the said delay but considering the contents of the affidavit, he left the discretion on the bench.
We have heard the submissions of the assessee and the contents of the affidavit and we find that there has not been any wilful neglect on the part of the assessee to file the appeal and as such, we condone the delay and admitted the for hearing.
The assessee has taken six grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 but the main grievance of the assessee is that the ld. first appellate authority has not decided the case on the merits on the ground contained in memorandum of appeal and has dismissed the appeal in limine.
Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs.52 lakhs in his bank a/c during the demonetisation period and in absence of any response to various notices issued from the department against PAN: AAIFM5199E (which apparently relates to a partnership firm). The assessment has been completed ex parte on a total income of Rs.91.96 lakhs (which included Rs.52 lakhs being addition u/s 69A of the Act on account of SBN deposits dated an amount of Rs.39.96 lakhs being 8% as estimated profits on the balance deposits in the bank A/c No. XXXXX000407).
The matter carried in appeal before the first appellate authority has been dismissed without any adjudication on merits in absence of any response to various notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) in course of appellate proceedings.
Before the tribunal, the Id. AR of the assessee filed a copy of bank certificate issued by the bankers Jammu & Kashmir Bank SSI Lal Chowk Branch, Srinagar, dated 27.02.2024 certifying the fact that the said bank A/c No. XXXXX000407 is a cash credit A/e which is linked to the PAN of individual assessee, Mr. Farooq Bhat the proprietor of the firm M/s Master General Store PAN: AGTPB1909L.
1 He further submitted that the partnership firm no more exists and the business of the firm has been taken by the proprietor and the entire transaction in the said bank A/c No. XXXXXX000407 are duly accounted for and recorded in the regular books of account of proprietorship business under the PAN of AGTPB1909L.
2 He further submitted the books of account of the assessee of the individual proprietor is regularly audited and regular return has also been filed.
3 As such, he claimed that since no notice of hearing has been received by the assessee from the first appellate authority, this factual aspect of the matter could not be placed on record and he prays for opportunity of hearing, so that all facts alongwith documentary evidences can be placed for proper adjudication in the matter.
The Id. DR relied on the order of the Id. CIT(A) but has no objection if the matter is remanded for fresh adjudication.
We have heard the rival submissions and considered the bank certificate placed before us and we are of the opinion that the case as stated by the ld. AR will have to be examined from documentary evidences to be filed by the assessee and as such, we remand the matter back to the file of the ld. first appellate authority to prove his case with necessary particulars and documentary evidences and to fully cooperate in appellate proceedings. The assessee will get reasonable opportunity of being heard.
We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and all legal issues are left open.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 10.12.2025 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963.
