Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a widow who took over her late husband's business, was aggrieved by an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) that dismissed her first appeal. The initial assessment order added Rs. 19,05,303/- as unexplained money under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that she was not given a fair opportunity to present her case and lacked understanding of business and tax laws.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the impugned assessment order was not adjudicated on merits. It was also found that the "impugned order" by the CIT(A) was not on merits. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the assessee cooperating with the department and not going into "slumber mode" when notices are issued.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits and whether the assessee was provided a fair opportunity to present her case.
Sections Cited
253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 144/144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1075983064(1) dated 01.05.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred to as the “Impugned order”. The Relevant Assessment year is 2017-
Factual Matrix 2.1 That as and by way of an Assessment order made u/s 147 rws 144/144B of the Act, the total income of the Assessee was computed & assessed at Rs. 24,47,680/-. The total income as per the return of income was at Rs.5,42,380/-. The addition of Rs.19,05,303/- was made as unexplained money u/s 69A of the act [para 5 of the assessment order]. The aforesaid “Assessment order” bears no:- ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1040908090(1) and that the same is dated 16/03/2022, which is herein after referred to as the “Impugned Assessment Order”
2.2 That the Assessee being Aggrieved by the aforesaid “Impugned Assessment Order” prefers the first appeal u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the 1st “Impugned Order” has dismissed the appeal of the Assessee on the grounds & reasons stated therein. The core
“xvii. In the instant case of the appellant, the appellant has failed to make any submissions in support of grounds of appeal, this gives rise to an undisputable conclusion that the assessee has got nothing more to say in this regard. This Appellate authority has gone through the record and based on the record this authority has decided to adjudicate the issue on the merits of the case and thus finds the addition made by the AO as correct for such cash deposits made during the demonetisation period considering them as un-explained income.
In the light of above discussed facts at point no.-(1) to (xvii), grossly negligent behaviour of the appellant assessee during the assessment proceedings and during the Appellate proceedings, non- seriousness shown for not filing of any application seeking condonation of delay in filing of this appeal (delayed), non- compliance to the hearing notice issued and not filing any submissions on merits or evidences to prove the AO's findings otherwise and also by placing reliance on the Judgment of Hon'ble Apex/ High Courts, this Appellate authority is in the view that, the addition made by the AO for Rs. 19,05,303/-as un-explained money u/s 69Arws115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is found to be correct and is thus UPHELD. Thus, the grounds of appeal no.-1 to 6 are not allowed. In the result, the appeal is NOT ALLOWED.”
2.3 The Assessee being Aggrieved by the “Impugned Order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and has raised the following grounds of appeal in the form No. 36 against the “Impugned Order” which are as under:-
“1.The Id. CIT(A) was not justified in ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the appellant, without deciding the appeal on merits, and that a fair and meaningful opportunity was not available to the appellant to present his case.
2. The Id. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 19,05,303/- without considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
The appellant carves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal.”
Record of Hearing 3.
3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 19.01.2026 when the Ld. AR for & on behalf of the Assessee appeared before this tribunal & interalia submitted that the “Impugned Order” is bad in law, illegal & not Proper. It is in the violation of the principles of natural justice. It therefore deserves to be set aside by this tribunal in exercise of it’s appellate power conferred upon under the act. It was then submitted that “impugned assessment order” and so also the “impugned order” are in sum and substance can be said to be “Ex-parte Orders”. The Ld. AR submitted that assessee is a widow and her husband expired all of a sudden in the month of March 2015 and as legal heir the assessee has takeover the business of her husband. Prior thereto she was a housewife. She does not understand the rules and regulation of the business as well of the income tax laws. The assessee late husband was Page 4 of 8 A.Y.2017-18 Satish Dhadse who was sole proprietor of M/s Ravi Raj Stone crusher which was engaged in the whole sale trading of “Crushed stones”. It was submitted that cash of approximately 19 Lakh was deposited in CC A/C- loan A/C with the bankers. It was finally submitted and prayed that the assessee would now like to place all the material information, details and documents before the Ld. AO provided the impugned order is set aside and in fact assessee is seeking an opportunity before the Ld. AO due to peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Per contra the Ld. DR appearing for and on behalf of the revenue submitted that the Dept. of Income Tax has no objection if this tribunal set aside the “impugned order” and remand the case back to the file of the Ld. AO on denovo basis.
Observations Findings & conclusions 4.1 We have to decide the legality, validity and proprietary of the “impugned order” basis records of the case & the rival submission canvassed before us.
Page 5 of 8 4.3 We basis records of the case & after hearing & upon examining the rival contentions of the Ld. AR & the Ld. DR canvassed before us, are of the considered opinion that the “impugned assessment order” is under section 144/144B of the Act and the matter has not been adjudicated and adjudged basis merits. Even the “impugned order” is not on merits strict senso. This tribunal desires that the total income of the assessee should be computed and assessed on the real time basis exigible to tax in accordance with law by following the due process of law under the Act. This tribunal also expects the assessee to be compliant and should cooperate with department of income tax as and when notices, summons, show cause notice etc. are issued. In brief this tribunal desires the meritorious disposal of both the “impugned assessment order” as well as the “impugned order”. The assessee’s cooperation in this regard assumes importance. The assessee in response to the notice(s) slumber mode. etc. cannot go in We are therefore of the considered view that the “impugned order” should be set aside
Page 6 of 8 A.Y.2017-18 remanded back to the file of Ld. AO for passing a fresh order on merits of the case. It is the expectation of this tribunal that the assessee would give his full and complete details of her income to the Ld. AO. The assessee to attend the hearings before the Ld. AO as and when fixed. The assessee to file reply, submissions, promptly before Ld. AO. The assessee to file requisite details, material and evidences before the Ld. AO.
4.4 In view of the premises drawn up by us we set aside the “impugned order” & remand the case back to the file of Ld. AO on denovo basis, who shall now pass a speaking & well- reasoned order.
5 Order 5.1 In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by way of remand back to the file of the Ld. AO as directed aforesaid.