JOHAR PRASAD,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA
Facts
The assessee failed to file income tax return for assessment year 2014-14. The Assessing Officer initiated proceedings under Section 147 and added cash deposits of Rs. 1,05,55,100/- as undisclosed income under Section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, after the assessee did not respond to various notices.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had a history of not responding to notices from the tax authorities. Although the appeal was delayed, the delay was condoned. The Tribunal decided to provide one last opportunity to the assessee and remitted the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming the addition without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee, despite the assessee's non-compliance with notices.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 142(1), 151, 144, 69A, 115BBE, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 121/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-14
Johar Prasad, Sector-11, 770 Vs. Income-tax Officer, EWS, Awas Vikas Yojna, Ward 1(1)(1), Agra. Sikandra, Agra. PAN : BGCPP4520M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.05.2025
ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 14.10.2024 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2013-14/10125184 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the
Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), wherein the learned CIT(Appeals) has confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer and dismissed assessee’s first appeal.
Briefly stating, the facts are that the appellant/assessee did not file his return of income for the year under consideration. Based on the information
ITA No.121/Agr/2025
available with the department, the Assessing Officer noticed that the
assessee had deposited cash of Rs.1,05,55,100/- in his saving bank
account maintained with the Nainital Bank Ltd., Agra during the year under
consideration. The Assessing Officer, therefore, initiated proceedings u/s.
147 by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 31.03.2021. The assessee did
neither respond to the said notice nor filed any return of income in
compliance thereto. Statutory notice dated 27.12.2021 u/s. 142(1) and a
reminder letter dated 20.01.2022 were issued. In response, the
appellant/assessee submitted his reply on ITBA portal on 28.01.2022,
wherein he requested the Assessing Officer to supply the requisite sanction
to be sought from the competent authority u/s. 151 of the Act before issuing
the notice u/s. 148. The assessee further remained irresponsive to the
notice dated 25.02.2022 issued u/s. 142(1) and show cause notice dated
08.03.2022 issued u/s. 144 of the Act. Since the assessee failed to furnish
any details/documentary evidence to explain the nature and source of the
aforesaid cash deposits, the Assessing Officer added the entire cash
deposits of Rs.1,05,55,100/- as undisclosed money u/s. 69A r.w.s. 115BBE
of the Act, vide assessment order dated 22.03.2022 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s.
144 of the Act.
2 | P a g e
ITA No.121/Agr/2025
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned
CIT(Appeals), who confirmed the addition made by the learned Assessing
Officer and dismissed assessee’s first appeal.
This second appeal has been preferred on the ground that Ld.
CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the said addition without affording
sufficient opportunity of hearing to the appellant assessee.
None responded on behalf of the appellant/assessee. Perused the
records and heard the ld. Departmental Representative for the Revenue.
Learned DR has submitted that the assessee was provided sufficient
opportunity of hearing by learned CIT(Appeals) on various occasions, but
for no avail. Learned DR has supported the impugned order.
At the very outset, it is noticed that this appeal was filed on
05.03.2025 against the impugned order dated 14.10.2024 by a delay of
about 80 days. According to the delay condonation application, appellant
was suffering from medical illness and being from rural background, was
unaware of the notices. Supported with affidavit. In view of unrebutted facts
of the assessee, there is sufficient cause for the delay. The delay is, thus,
condoned.
It transpires from the perusal of record that the assessee did not
respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(Appeals) on 28.10.2022,
03.10.2023, 05.10.2023, 15.11.2023 and 09.09.2024. Such an 3 | P a g e
ITA No.121/Agr/2025
irresponsive conduct of the assessee cannot be appreciated. However, in
the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to afford
last opportunity to the assessee and remit the matter back to the file of
learned CIT(Appeals) for adjudication of the matter afresh. We order
accordingly. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative
in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned
CIT(Appeals) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Assessee shall
refrain from seeking any adjournment but for compelling and unavoidable
reasons. Needless to say that learned CIT(Appeals) shall ensure the
observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be
allowed accordingly.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Impugned
order dated 14.10.2024 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.05.2025.
Sd/- Sd/-
(MANISH AGARWAL) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.05.2025 *aks/-
