Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, engaged in gold jewelry and textiles, did not file an ITR for AY 2014-15. Information revealed a cash deposit of Rs. 3.19 crores, leading to reassessment proceedings and an addition under Section 69 by the AO for unexplained cash deposits, which was confirmed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's non-compliance and lack of evidence. The assessee appealed to the Tribunal, citing illness and non-receipt of hearing notices as reasons for non-appearance before lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding on its merits due to the assessee's non-representation and lack of documentary evidence. In the interest of justice and to provide the assessee a proper opportunity to be heard, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee is directed to submit all necessary documents and cooperate during the appellate proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of Rs. 3.19 crores as unexplained cash deposit under Section 69 was justified, and if the CIT(A) was correct in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits due to the assessee's non-appearance.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B, 148, 148(A)(b), 44AB, 69
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27.11.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of the AO, NFAC, Delhi dated 24.05.2023 passed u/s 147/144B of the I.T. Act, 1961.
“1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the additions made by the AO to the total income of the appellant. This is bad in law and needs to be reversed.
The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by dismissing the appeal. This is against the law and the order passed by the CIT(A) relooked into.
3. That the appellant reserves the right to add, alter, amend, modify and delete any ground of appeal.”
Brief facts emerging from the record are that the assessee is engaged in the business of gold jewelery and textiles at Bandipor, Jammu & Kashmir. The assessee has not filed any return for the year under appeal and on the basis of information in possession of the Assessing Officer, that the assessee has deposited cash in bank amounting to Rs.3.19 cores, proceedings were initiated as per the provisions of section 148(A)(b) of the Act and after due procedure, notice has been issued u/s 148 on 26.06.2022 in respect to which return has been filed by the assessee.
During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished written submissions along with the financial statements for the year under appeal where it is observed by the Assessing Officer, that the assessee has not substantiated his case by documentary evidences and in absence of any purchase and sales invoices regarding business carried out by the assessee, the genuineness of the transactions could not be his financials, no tax audit report u/s 44AB of the Act has been uploaded in the portal. As such, considering the lack of factual evidences, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment on a total income of Rs.3.21 crores ‘(which includes the addition of Rs.3.19 crores u/s 69 of the Act)’.
The matter was carried in appeal before the first appellate authority and the ld. CIT(A), NFAC dismissed the appeal in absence of any response or representation by the assessee in course of appellate proceedings by observing as follows:
“11. Thus, I find that the appellant has not been able to substantiate the sources of cash deposit with documentary evidence. The appellant has not uploaded any documentary evidence to explain the sources of cash deposited. Accordingly, I do not agree with the contentions of the appellant and hold that Ld AO has correctly treated the cash deposited in the savings bank account as income from undisclosed sources. Grounds of the appellant are dismissed.”
It is also seen that the notices of hearing were issued on various dates from the office of the ld. first appellate authority but there has not been any compliance to such notices.
Now, the matter is in appeal before the Tribunal and the ld. AR of the assessee has filed a paper book containing the computer print out of cash book for the entire financial year along with the copy of its tax audit report in Form No. 3CB and 3CD treatment in various hospitals, in support of which he has filed copies of medical documents which relates to the period of June and July, 2018 and submits that since the assessee was medically ill he could not appear before the Assessing Officer in course of assessment proceedings and the medical treatment continued and he could not appear before the ld. CIT(A) in course of appellate proceedings and at the same time he also says that he has not received any notice of hearing in e-mail id provided in Form No. 35 and as such he prays that another opportunities of hearing may be given so that he could place necessary documents for consideration and proper adjudication.
The ld. DR has no objection if the matter is remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication though, however, he has pointed out that the medical certificates and documents pertains to the period of 2018 where as the assessment order and the appellate order pertains to the period of 2024 and this medical certificate has got no applicability.
We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record and we find that in the instant case, in absence of any representation by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), the issue has not been decided on merits of the case in absence of any documentary evidences before him. We also find that the matter is not interest of justice, we remanded the matter back to the files of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
The assessee is directed to file all necessary documents in support of his case and to fully cooperate in appellate proceedings for proper disposal. The assessee should be allowed proper opportunity of being heard.
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 07.07.2025