GHULAM MOHD RATHER,ASHMUJI vs. ITO, ANNATNAG
Facts
The assessee, engaged in poultry business, deposited substantial cash (Rs. 7.38 crores) in bank accounts but did not file income tax returns for A.Y. 2014-15 and 2016-17. Reassessment proceedings were initiated, leading to additions based on these deposits. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals due to the assessee's non-compliance and non-response to notices, which the assessee challenged, claiming a denial of proper hearing opportunity.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that notices were sent to the correct email IDs provided by the assessee. However, in the interest of justice, to allow the assessee a fair chance to substantiate his business and explain the source of deposits, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) provided proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and the justification of additions without considering the nature of the business and supporting evidence.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 148, 282
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
Both the appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi even dated 30.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
which has emanated from the order of the Assessment Unit, ITD, passed u/s 147 r.w.s.
144 of the Act, 1961 dated 06.03.2023 and 13.03.2023 respectively.
2 I.T.A. Nos. 171 & 172/Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 2. There are four grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 and the
main grievance of the assessee is that no proper opportunity of hearing has been granted
by the ld. first appellate authority and the appeal has been dismissed without
considering the nature of business of the assessee and without proper adjudication of
the appeal on merits of the case.
Brief facts emerging from the records are that the assessee is engaged in the
business of poultry and in spite of making a cash deposit amounting to Rs.7.38 crores
in his Bank A/c No. xxxx000162 with J & K Bank Ltd. during the financial year 2013-
14, no return of income has been filed.
In absence of any compliance to notices issued, reassessment proceedings were
initiated u/s 148 dated 25.07.2022 (as per procedure) and eventually on account of no
response to subsequent notices, documents were gathered from banks and the
assessment have been completed on a total income of Rs. 7.39 crores (with an addition
of Rs.7.38 cores being the cash deposit in J & K Bank A/c No. xxxx162, plus an amount
of Rs.28,965/- being the cash deposit in A/c No. xxxx12564 plus bank interest of
Rs.9,687/-).
The matter caried in appeal has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of
non-compliance, and non-response to various notices issued to the assessee on various
dates in different e-mail ids as evident from (page no. 2) of the appellate order.
3 I.T.A. Nos. 171 & 172/Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 6. Now, the asssessee is before the Tribunal on the grounds that no proper
opportunity has been granted by the ld. first appellate authority. On the date of hearing,
there has not been any personal representation by the assessee or his ld. AR, neither
physically nor virtually, except a submission that the notices issued in various e-mail
ids mentioned in the body of the appellate order does not belong to the assessee and
the assessee has never received any notice of hearing and he further stated that the
earlier counsel of the assessee to whom notice might have been issued has never
informed or intimated the assessee regarding the ongoing appeal process and as such,
no representation could be made.
However, he submits that the assessee is engaged in the business of poultry and
the entire deposits in cash in his bank account are made out of sale proceeds of the
poultry business and he has prayed for an opportunity of hearing to file all documentary
evidences before the ld. first appellate authority which according to the assessee has
been submitted in course of appellate proceedings which has not been considered.
The ld. D.R. relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) but pointed out that the notices
have been issued in the e-mail id cavaseemahmed@gmail.com on 14.03.2024 and it is
the same e-mail id which is mentioned in Form No. 35 and as such, the allegation
regarding non issue of notice by the ld. first appellate authority is totally false and
baseless. However, he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the ld. first
4 I.T.A. Nos. 171 & 172/Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 appellate authority for consideration of fresh documentary evidences for proper
adjudication of the matter.
We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record and
we find that the notices from the office of the ld. CIT(A) has been issued to the same
e-mail id, which is contained in Form No. 35 cavaseemahmed@gmail.com and we
further note that in Form No. 36, the e-mail id contained is that of
ahmadcavaseem@gail.com and in the statement of facts submitted, the assessee has
already accepted the fact that notices has been received in course of assessment
proceedings and for compliance of the same, the matter was handed-over to a tax
consultant who has not represented the matter properly with necessary documentary
evidences. As such, the question of non-receipt of notice in this case does not arise and
the grievance raised by the assessee regarding non receipt of notice of hearing at the
assessment stage as well as at the first appeal stage are found to be incorrect.
However, considering the factual aspect of the matter that the assessee is
engaged in poultry business and considering the fact that there is huge turnover of the
assessee of more than Rs.7.38 crores and no return of income has been submitted in
normal course nor in response to notice issued by the department, we are of the opinion
that there is an intentional neglect on the part of the assessee in trying to avoid
compliance of the provisions of the Act.
5 I.T.A. Nos. 171 & 172/Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 11. However, in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion, that one more
opportunity should be provided to the assessee to submit all necessary papers, books
of accounts and documents in support of his business activity, to prove its existence
and to explain the source of bank deposits and as such, we remand the matter back to
the files of the ld. first appellate authority to dispose off the grounds contained in Form
No. 35 on merits of the case after considering all the submissions and documentary
evidences to be submitted by the assessee and the assessee is also directed to fully
cooperate in appellate proceedings.
Necessary report may be obtained by the appellate authority as per provisions of
law.
The assessee will be allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard and notices
to be issued as per provisions of section 282 of the Act and also in the e-mail id in
Form No. 35 and in the e-mail id as per available in the portal.
We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
I.T.A. No. 172/Asr/2025 for A.Y. 2016-17:
The facts of this case are identical to the facts given in ITA No. 171/Asr/2025
and all our observations applied mutatis mutandis to this appeal also. Since, we have
6 I.T.A. Nos. 171 & 172/Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2016-17 remanded the matter for fresh consideration before the ld. first appellate authority for
A.Y. 2014-15, the appeal for this year is also remanded back to the ld. first appellate
authority to be considered afresh and the assessee is specifically directed to file all
documentary evidences along with the written submissions and produce books of
account to substantiate, the existence of business and to fully explain the source of cash
deposits in the bank account.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate
Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 27.11.2025
Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order
