RUKSHMANI SINGH NATHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 2(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 26-02-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2017-18 raising grounds of appeal in Form 36.

2 MRS RUKSHMANI SINGH NATHAWAT VS ITO WARD 2(3), JAIPUR 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that there is delay of 24 days in filing the appeal by the assesse for which the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay and mainly submitted as under:- ‘’4. In these circumstances the order passed by the NFAC (A) on 26-02-2024 and posted on the income tax portal had come to the knowledge of the appellant in the first week of May, 2024. The assessee firm immediately forwarded the papers and consulted to another profession to look into the order and advice. He advised the assessee firm to file a belated appeal to the ITAT against the order of the NFAC(A) with the application for condonation of delay narrating the true facts. Accordingly, the appellant is filing the appeal to TITAT and requests to condone the delay of 24 days in filing the appeal as delay happened due to sufficient knowledge and information with the appellant regarding income tax matters and had no knowledge of the profession of the Income Tax Act, had completely relied on the professional.’’ 2.2 On the other hand, the ld DR objected for such delay in filing the appeal by the assessee but submitted that the Court may decide the issue as deem fit and proper in the case. 2.3 The Bench has heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noted that the there is a merit in the submission of the assessee for late filing of appeal which is allowed. 3.1 As regards the main appeal of the assessee, the Bench noted that the assessee was ex-parte before the AO as well as before the ld CIT(A). From the appeal of the 3 MRS RUKSHMANI SINGH NATHAWAT VS ITO WARD 2(3), JAIPUR assessee, it is noted that the AO made an addition of Rs.12.00 lacs in the hands of the assessee by observing as under:- ‘’9. The assessee has made cash deposits amounting to Rs.12,00,000/- appearing in bank account in the F.Y. 2016-17 relevant to A.Y. 2017-18 remained unexplained. The assessee has not responded to notice u/s 142(1) issued during assessment proceedings. The assessee failed to give any explanation about the nature and source of cash deposits, hence the value of cash deposits of Rs.12,00,000- appearing in Andhara Bank Account is deemed as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and added to the total income of the assessee. The total income assessed is taxed u/s 115BBE of the Act at the rate or 60’’. The ld. CIT(A) as mentioned at para 4 of his order provided 9th opportunities to the assessee but the assessee did not furnish any document. Hence, in the absence of any supporting document, the ld.CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO and thus upheld the addition made by the AO amounting to Rs.12.00 lacs on account of unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 3.2 During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel of the assessee has filed a detailed written submission and submitted that the assessee is a widow of an Indian Army Officer who receives family pension from India Army, Rental income and Interest income from FDR’s and saving Bank A/c’s LIC during the year under consideration. The assessee is a homemaker and law abiding citizen and has been paying income tax for many years. The ld. Counsel further submitted that the appeal of the appellant should not be dismissed on the grounds of non-compliance