ABHISHEK AGRAWAL,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), GWALIOR, GWALIOR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside to allow the assessee a fresh opportunity to be heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee deposited Rs. 1,25,50,000/- during demonetization, claiming it was from jewelry trading and accumulated funds. The Assessing Officer treated Rs. 73,52,180/- as unexplained income.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without proper notice to the assessee and whether the assessee had sufficient cause for non-appearance.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Date of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 06.08.2025 ORDER, PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM,
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against an order dated 20.02.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Ld. CIT(A), relating to Assessment Year 2017-18 arising out of order u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act’) dated 24.12.2019.
Brief facts of the case:- This case was selected for complete scrutiny for the reasons “cash deposits during the year”. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.1,25,50,000/- during the demonetization period. The assessee explained that the source of the cash deposits made by the assessee during the demonetization period was regular funds from trading in jewellery and accumulated funds. The Assessing Officer did not accept the entire explanation of the assessee and accepted a sum of Rs.37,07,920/- as cash from sales and treated the balance amount of Rs.73,52,180/- as unexplained and added it u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act.
Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte as according to him the notices u/s 250 of the Act issued for hearing of the appeal was served upon the assessee on 17.02.2021, 05.02.2024 and 04.02.2025 but no details were submitted by the assessee. Thereafter, the ld. CIT(A) discussed the matter on merits and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
During the hearing before us, it was submitted by the Ld. AR as stated in grounds of appeal no.1 of the appeal that the Ld. CITA) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte for which no message of notice was received. Thus, it is seen that the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and the ld.AR requested that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to explain the facts before the ld. CIT(A).
The ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the reasons given by the assessee for non-appearance sufficient cause for non-appearance before the Ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, in the interest of justice, set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for deciding this issue afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Further, the assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) during the course of hearing.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 06th August, 2025.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026