MOTI LAL YADAV,AGRA vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(2), AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 267/AGR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 March 2025AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee is granted another opportunity to substantiate its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared an income of Rs. 3.15 Lacs, but a cash deposit of Rs. 22 Lacs was made. The Assessing Officer added this amount under Sections 68 & 69A r.w.s. 115BBE for failure to respond to notices.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the unexplained cash deposit and the assessee's failure to provide substantiation. The Tribunal considered the possibility of communication gaps in the faceless regime.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AGRA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 12-03-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 of the Act on 24-12-2019. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of cash deposit for Rs.22 Lacs. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee and accordingly, the appeal was heard with the able assistance of Ld. Sr. DR. The registry has noted a delay of 68 days in the appeal which stand condoned.

2.

The assessee’s case was scrutinized to examine the source of cash & credit deposit of Rs.22 Lacs. The assessee had declared income of Rs.3.15 Lacs. Since the assessee failed to respond to hearing notices, the amount of Rs.22 Lacs was added u/s 68 & 69A r.w.s. 115BBE. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for the same very reason. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps during faceless regime, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced u/r 34(4) of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सद" /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद" /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 28-03-2025 आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. ""थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड"फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →