SHRI ABDUL AHAD WANI,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, 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.:
Both the appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)
NFAC, Delhi dated 08.02.2024 and 03.05.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,
1961 which has emanated from the orders of the AO, Ward, Srinagar passed u/s 144
and 143(3) of the Act, 1961 dated 28.12.2019 and 18.12.2019 respectively.
I.T.A. No. 362/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18:
Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that the appeal is filed
belatedly by 71 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay
stating that there has not been any service of order passed u/s 250 of the Act on the
assessee and he has given screenshots of the portal and also explained from the copies
of order passed u/s 250 to submit that the address of the assessee has been incorrectly
quoted as Hyderpora near J. & K. Bank, Srinagar when the correct address has been
quoted in Form No. 35 as Peer Bagh, Hyderpora, J & K. He also pointed out from the
screenshots that the order has not been issued in the e-mail id caiqbal12@gmail.com
which has resulted in non-receipt of the appellate order in time and the delay in receipt
of the order has resulted in late filing of the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.
3 I.T.A. Nos. 362 & 378/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 3. As such, he prayed for condonation of delay on account of technical irregularity
and has prayed for admission of the appeal to be heard on merits.
The ld. D. R. has no objection. Considering the technical issues pointed out and
the incorrect address mentioned in the appellate order, we condone the delay being not
intentional or willful on the part of the assessee and admit the appeal to be heard on
merits.
The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal and main objection of the assessee
is that the order has been passed by the ld. first appellate authority without allowing
proper opportunity of hearing and without adjudicating the grounds of appeal
contained in Form No. 35 on merits of the case.
As such, he prayed for an opportunity of hearing before the ld. first appellate
authority.
The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the notice
has been issued on four different dates of haring as evident from the appellate order
para 6 but he could not confirm as to how and through which e-mail id, the said notices
has been served on the assessee. However, he has no objection if the matter is
remanded back to the files of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
4 I.T.A. Nos. 362 & 378/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 8. We have heard the rival submissions and considered the material on record and
we find that it is a case of cash deposit of SBN during demonetization period where
cash amounting to Rs.34.33 lakhs has been deposited by the assessee in his Bank A/c
No. xxxxx00001 which needs to be explained and the source of such deposits are to be
proved by production of books of account including cash book. As such, in the interest
of justice, we remand the matter back to the files of the ld. first appellate authority for
adjudication of this appeal afresh on merits as per grounds contained in Form No. 35
with a direction to the assessee for production of necessary books of account along
with the supporting documentary evidences to prove the source of cash deposits (SBN)
in bank during the demonetization period and to fully co-operate in the first appellate
proceedings.
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 to his counsel’s mail
id caiqbal12@gmail.com.
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 purpose.
5 I.T.A. Nos. 362 & 378/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 I.T.A. No. 378/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2017-18:
The issues are identical in this appeal where the ld. CIT(A) has disposed of this
appeal and as such sustained the addition without proper opportunity of hearing to the
assessee, in absence of any response or submissions made by the assessee in course of
appellate proceedings. However, in this case it seems that the assessee has sought for
an adjournment before the ld. first appellate authority on 05.03.2024 and there has not
been any compliance thereafter. This is also an identical case where cash (SBN) has
been deposited by the assessee in his bank accounts maintained with J & K Bank A/c
No. xxxxxx00001 and xxxxxx000010614, source of which needs to be satisfactorily
explained.
Our observations in ITA No. 362/Asr/2024 applied mutatis mutandis to this
appeal also and in the interest of the justice, we remand this matter back to the files of
the ld. first appellate authority with similar directions and we also direct the assessee
to fully co-operate in the appellate proceedings by furnishing all documentary
evidences including books of accounts in support of his contention.
The assessee to be allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard.
6 I.T.A. Nos. 362 & 378/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 15. 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 26.09.2025
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
