NAZIR AHMAD QADRI GOUSIA COLONY, NAMBLABAL PAMPORE ,JAMMU AND KASHMIR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(4) ANANTNAG JAO INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD UDHAMPUR, JAMMU AND KASHMIR

PDF

ITA 517/ASR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar28 July 2025AY 2017-2018Bench: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA (Judicial Member)4 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The assessee deposited Rs. 27.11 lacs in bank accounts during FY 2016-17, including Rs. 12.35 lacs in cash during demonetization. The AO made a best judgment assessment u/s 144, adding the cash deposits u/s 69A and business income, as the assessee failed to respond to notices u/s 142(1). The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, noting that it was a duplicate and the original appeal against the same assessment order had already been disposed of.

Held

The Tribunal observed that the current appeal was against a CIT(A) order dated 15.07.2024, which itself dismissed a duplicate appeal as the original appeal against the assessment order dated 10.12.2019 had been adjudicated earlier by the CIT(A) on 12.07.2024. As the assessee failed to appear or make submissions, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal before it was infructuous and dismissed it.

Key Issues

Whether an appeal against a CIT(A) order dismissing a duplicate appeal, where the original appeal was already adjudicated, is maintainable before the ITAT.

Sections Cited

Section 250, Section 144, Section 142(1), Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA

Hearing: 09.07.2025Pronounced: 28.07.2025

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 12.07.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of the A.O., Ward 3(4), Anantnag dated 10.12.2019 passed u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961. amount of Rs.27.11 lacs in his bank accounts during the financial year 2016-17, out of which an amount of Rs.12.35 lacs has been deposited in cash during the demonetization period (as per details contained in page no. 2 of the assessment order). However, in absence of any response from the assessee to notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Act, the assessment has been completed on the basis of informations contained in the bank statements obtained by the AO from bankers. Total income has been assessed at Rs.13,53,415/- (which includes an addition of Rs.12.35 lacs u/s 69A of the Act being the cash deposited during the demonetization period plus an amount of Rs.1.18 lacs on account of business income determined @ 8% of remaining bank deposits).

The matter was carried in appeal and the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by observing as follows:

“3. It is noted that the appellant had filed appeal through speed post before CIT(A), Jammu on 20.01.2020 claiming that internet services were not functional in the valley and subsequently has filed the instant appeal electronically against the same assessment order on 12.10.2020 with condonation on the ground of non-availability of internet services. Therefore, these two appeals lying in the system are being dealt with together by NFAC.

Now, the NFAC has disposed off the appeal which filed through speed post before CIT(A) Jammu on 20.01.2020 vide DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066654550(1) dated 12.07.2024. Since this is the duplicate appeal filed by the appellant against the same assessment order and the original appeal has been dismissed by the NFAC, the instant appeal does not survive and hence the instant appeal is being dismissed.”