Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, ADDS Aquaculture Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against an order that arose from a reassessment proceeding. The delay in filing the appeal was 469 days, for which an application for condonation was filed and supported by an affidavit. The assessee claimed that an addition for unexplained money, part of the turnover, was made without proper consideration.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 469 days in filing the appeal, acknowledging the bonafide reasons provided by the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the Assessing Officer to conduct a denovo assessment, considering all details and submissions, and affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the addition made by the AO for unexplained money, which was part of the turnover, is justified without proper consideration.
Sections Cited
139, 144, 148, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR
Before: DR. MANISH BORAD
I.T.A.No.577/NAG/2025 (Assessment Year : 2017-2018) ADDS Aquaculture Pvt. ITO, Ward-4(4), Nagpur Ltd., 3027, Narendra vs. Nagar, Nagpur. PAN : AANCA 4678 C (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Abhay Agrawal, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 02.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 10.02.2026 ORDER This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], dated 12/04/2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') which is arising out of assessment order dated 06.12.2019 passed u/s. 144 of the Act by the ITO, Ward-4(4), Nagpur for the Assessment Year 2017-18 (A.Y.)
Registry has informed that there is a delay of 469 days in filing the instant appeal. Application for condonation of delay along with affidavit has been filed and placed on record. Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) opposed for condonation of delay. I have gone through the contents of the affidavit and the 2 ITA.No.577/NAG/2025 (ADDS Aquaculture Pvt. Ltd.) reasons stated for delay and find that the same are reasonable cause and the assessee had bonafide reason giving rise to this delay and also find that the delay is not intentional and that the assessee has not gained by the delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, adopting a justice oriented approach and also taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), I hereby condone the delay of 469 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.
At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that against the addition of ₹ 9,50,000/-, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), however, assessee failed to succeed since no compliance was made before the Ld. CIT(A). Referring to the paper book running into 43 pages, he prayed that issues may please be restored to the file of Ld.Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) as the assessee has sufficient material evidence to prove that the alleged addition for unexplained money is uncalled for. He also submitted that Ld.AO, on the one hand, has accepted the business income of the assessee calculated under the presumptive taxation scheme on the turnover of ₹ 53,92,009/-, but then has again
3 ITA.No.577/NAG/2025 (ADDS Aquaculture Pvt. Ltd.) made a separate addition for unexplained money of ₹5,50,000/- which also forms part of turnover of ₹ 53,92,009/-
On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the orders of both the lower authorities.
I have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before me. I observe that assessee a private limited company, did not file regular return of income u/s. 139 of the Act for A.Y. 2017-18. Based on the information about cash deposits of ₹ 11,64,000/- in Vijaya Bank, Nagpur, Ld.AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the Act for carrying out re-assessment proceedings. During the course of re-assessment proceedings, assessee furnished details of business turnover, carried out during the year at₹ 53,92,009/- and Ld.AO computed net profit @8% at ₹ 4,31,360/- declared by the assessee. However, for the cash deposits during the demonetization period of ₹ 9,50,000/- which even though forms part of the gross turnover, a separate addition has been made. Certain details regarding business activity of the assessee along with evidence of purchase made from Rosoya Proteins Ltd., cash flow statement and cash sales bills remains to be considered by the Ld.AO.
Under these given facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and direct the Ld.JAO for denovo assessment to be carried out after duly
4 ITA.No.577/NAG/2025 (ADDS Aquaculture Pvt. Ltd.) considering the details and submissions filed by the assessee to explain that total turnover including the alleged cash deposits is the total turnover of the year and that only profit element on such business turnover is liable to be taxed. Needless to mention that Ld. JAO shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and then decide the issues in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.