HUSAINSAB RAJESAB BAGWAN,BIJAPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, , BIJAPUR
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The CIT(Appeals) confirmed the AO's order and dismissed the assessee's appeal. However, considering the assessee is a vegetable vendor and in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee deposited Rs. 11,98,000 in Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) during the demonetization period. The AO issued notices for filing return of income, which the assessee failed to furnish, leading to an assessment order under section 144 of the Act.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was provided with a reasonable opportunity to present their case before the revenue authorities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
Per Bench This appeal is filed by the assessee against the Order dated 30.08.2023 passed by the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [NFAC], for the AY 2017-18.
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the information was gathered under ‘Operation Clean Money’ that the appellant deposited substantial cash of Rs.11,98,000 in Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) in its bank account during the demonetization period. The AO issued notices for filing return of income, but the assessee failed to furnish it.
Letters and final show cause notice was issued on 25.10.2019 by the AO. Due to non-response, the AO passed the assessment order u/s. 144 of the Act and assessed income of entire cash deposits of Rs.11,98,000 u/s. 69A of the Act.
On appeal, the CIT(Appeals) issued notices but the assessee did not file any submission in support of its grounds of appeal. Therefore the CIT(Appeals) confirmed the order of the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Against this, the assessee has filed before the ITAT.
The ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a vegetable vendor and he has no other source of income, except purchase and sale of vegetables. The amount was deposited during the course of demonetization period out of his savings. He was not aware of income-tax proceedings and therefore could not comply with the notices issued by the CIT(Appeals). The ld. AR requested for another chance and undertook to substantiate the case of assessee with necessary documents before the revenue authorities.
The ld. DR submitted that the assessee had not availed several opportunities provided by both the revenue authorities even the return of income was not filed by the assessee.
After considering the rival submissions, we note that the assessee has not availed opportunities before both the revenue authorities. The AO has made the addition and the CIT(Appeals) has confirmed the same. Considering the submissions of the ld. AR that the assessee is a vegetable vendor, in the interest of justice, we think it fit to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case. Accordingly, we remit the issue to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh decision in accordance with law after reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce the correct email-id and contact details and all the relevant documents to substantiate his claim and avoid seeking unnecessary adjournment for early disposal of the case.
In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court through virtual hearing on this 28th day of February, 2024.
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 Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026