SHRI GHULAM NABI DAND ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, UDHAMPUR
Facts
The assessee deposited Rs. 58 lakhs in a bank account during AY 2016-17. In the absence of an income tax return and any response to notices, the Assessing Officer completed an ex-parte assessment, treating the deposit as unexplained income under Section 69A. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 180-day delay, as the CIT(A) refused to condone the delay.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the assessee's 32-day delay in filing the appeal to the ITAT, noting his medical condition. It then remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, instructing the AO to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity to present documentary evidence to establish his business and explain the source of the cash deposits. The Tribunal directed the AO to issue notice as per Section 282.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; whether the ex-parte assessment was valid without proper opportunity; and the treatment of cash deposits as unexplained income.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 147, Section 144, Section 69A, Section 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.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (A) NFAC,
Delhi dated 04.11.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of the AO, Ward, Udhampur passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the
Act, 1961 dated 24.01.2024.
2 I.T.A. No. 88/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 2. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that the appeal is filed
belatedly by 32 (thirty-two) days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating that he was medically ill and has suffered a heart attack on 15th November, 2024, and has been admitted to hospital for a surgical procedure. He has
filed medical documents from the Department of Medical Record, Sher-i- Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar. After being discharged from hospital on 25th November, 2024, he filed this appeal before the Tribunal on 4th February, 2025 which
was belated by 32 days. Considering medical issues, he prayed for condonation of
delay and admission of the appeal to be heard on merits.
The ld. D.R. has no objection.
Considering the prayer of the assessee, we condone the delay.
Brief facts emerging from the records are that the assessee has deposited an amount of Rs.58 lakhs in his bank account with Jammu & Kashmir Bank during the
financial year 2015-16 (relevant to the assessment year 2016-17). In absence of any
return on record and in absence of any response to various notices issued by the
department, regarding the source of the amount deposited in the bank, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex-parte on a total income of Rs.58,00,450/- treating
the amount of cash deposited in bank as unexplained income u/s 69A of the Act.
3 I.T.A. No. 88/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 6. The matter carried in appeal has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) refusing to
condone the delay of 180 days in filing the appeal before the ld. first appellate
authority, by observing as follows:
“Thus, there exists no sufficient and good reason for the delay of 180 Days. Such delay cannot be condoned as condonation in the present case would not be in accordance with the exposition emanating out of the Hon'ble apex Court and Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court decisions. It will rather be grave prejudice to the Department
1, therefore, decline to condone the delay of 180 Days, and dismiss this appeal of the appellant as barred by limitation.
In view of the above discussion appeal is rendered as inadmissible.”
Now, the assessee is before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in the
memorandum of appeal and one of the main grievance of the assessee is that he has
not been allowed proper and reasonable opportunity to present his case before the ld.
first appellate authority, because the case has been dismissed without admission of the
appeal on the grounds of delay.
In course of hearing, there was no appearance but the assessee (through written
submission) stated that the assessee is a small trader engaged in the business of various
types of goods mainly cigarettes and the assessee is also a senior-citizen of about 65
years, and not at all conversant with operation of computer system. It is further stated
that he is resident of Rainawari, Srinagar, and being illiterate, he was not able to
4 I.T.A. No. 88/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 receive any notice that has been issued in his income tax portal and he was not at all
aware of the ongoing proceedings before the Income Tax Authorities and no notice of
hearing has been actually received by him and he was only aware once penalty notices were served on him in a physical mode along with the hard copy of the order on 5th
Aug., 2024. It is further stated that the e-mail id through which notices has been served
by the Income Tax Department actually belong to his consultant and since he has
already shifted his residential address from Kralyar Rainawari, Srinagar to Zakura,
Hazratbal, Srinagar, notices if any which might have been sent by post has gone back
unserved. He further submitted that the entire deposits in bank account which has been
treated as income u/s 69A of the Act are his sale proceeds from business of trading and
he would like to furnish documentary evidences and represent his case before the ld.
first appellate authority provided an opportunity of hearing is granted.
The ld. DR has no objection if the matter is remanded back to the files of the ld.
CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record and
we find that the assessment order has also been passed ex-parte in this case and there
has not been any representation from the assessee at the assessment stage. Explanation
given by the assessee regarding his change of address might have been one of the
reasons as to why the notices has not been received by him.
5 I.T.A. No. 88/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 11. Along with the documents submitted before us, he has also filed a copy of the
bank statement of Jammu & Kashmir Bank A/c No. xxxxx00981 along with the ledger
account of sales and copies of VAT invoices as evidence of purchase and existence of
business. It is also observed by us that there are deposits in the said bank account and
there are also withdrawals from the same bank account which might have been utilized
for the purpose of purchase of goods.
As such, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the assessee has registered himself in the e-filing portal on 9th Aug., 2024, (through help
from his counsel) and thereafter filed the appeal before ld. CIT(A) on 21.08.2024
belated by one hundred eighty days, due to non-receipt of the assessment order earlier.
We are also of the opinion that interest of justice will be served if the matter is
remanded back to the files of the Assessing Officer for afresh assessment (instead
before first appeal, considering the ex-parte assessment order) and the assessee is also
directed to furnish all documentary evidences along with the books of account, bank
statement and all purchase invoices to establish and prove the existence of his business
and to explain the source of the cash deposits in the bank account to the satisfaction of
the Assessing Officer.
6 I.T.A. No. 88/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 13. The A.O. will allow reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and
notice to be issued as per provisions of section 282 of the Act, 61 and in e-mail id in
the portal.
We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and all issues are left
open.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate
Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 16.10.2025
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
