VINOD KUMAR SINGHAL,MORENA vs. ITO-1, MORENA
Facts
The assessee did not file a return of income for the assessment year 2011-12. Upon noticing a substantial deposit in a bank account, the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings. The Assessing Officer added the cash deposit as unexplained income as the assessee could not explain the nature of business activities or source of funds.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to respond to notices from the first appellate authority. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to provide a last opportunity and remitted the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for adjudication. The assessee was directed to be diligent and cooperative.
Key Issues
Whether the addition of cash deposit as unexplained income was justified, and whether the proceedings were valid.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 142(1), 69A, 143(3)
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. 123/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12
Vinod Kumar Singhal, Prop. M/s Vs. Income-tax Officer-1, Singhal & Sons, Telipada, Morena. Morena (M.P.) PAN : AJJPS1537J (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 18.10.2024 passed in Appeal No. CIT (A), Gwalior/10646/2018-19 by the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-2, Guwahati u/s. 250 of
the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), wherein the learned first appellate authority has dismissed assessee’s first appeal. 2. Briefly stating, the facts are that the appellant/assessee did not file
his return of income for the year under consideration. Having noticed that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.15,86,000/- during the year under consideration in his saving bank account No. 430100007232,
ITA No.123/Agr/2025
maintained with UCO Bank, Morena, the Assessing Officer initiated
proceedings u/s. 147 by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act, in response to
which the assessee filed his return of income on 05.12.2018 declaring
total income of Rs.1,44,840/-. Statutory notices were also issued to the
assessee on various dates, which stood un-responded. However, in
response to final show cause notice issued u/s. 142(1) dated 19.11.2018,
the assessee filed a written submission on 03.12.2018, stating that the
assessee had filed return of income and his income is below taxable limit.
Statement of the assessee was also recorded on oath. The Assessing
Officer, however, found that the assessee could neither disclose the
nature of his business activities nor could he explain the source of cash
deposit in his bank account. Therefore, the Assessing Officer added the
aforesaid cash deposit of Rs.15,86,000/- to the income of assessee as
unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act, vide assessment order dated
25.12.2018 passed u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Act.
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 and validity of
proceedings. 2 | P a g e
ITA No.123/Agr/2025
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.
It transpires from the perusal of record that the assessee did not
respond to the notices issued by the first appellate authority on
01.01.2021, 14.10.2021, 08.04.2022, 17.05.2023, 25.09.2024 and
04.10.2024. Such an 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.
3 | P a g e
ITA No.123/Agr/2025
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Impugned order dt. 18.10.2024 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/-
