MITRA SEN,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee an opportunity to present evidence and be heard.
What were the facts?
The Income Tax Department added Rs. 12,60,000/- to the assessee's income, representing cash recovered by police from the assessee's possession. The assessee failed to prove the ownership and source of this cash, and it was not disclosed in their updated return.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition of unexplained cash found in the assessee's possession is justified. Whether the ex parte decision of the CIT(A) warrants a de novo adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI
O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in AY 2021-22, arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 23.07.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 22.12.2022 by the Assessing Officer, DCIT, Central Circle, Dehradun (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).
The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is challenging the addition of Rs. 12,60,000/- made in respect of cash recovered by Uttrakhand Police Authorities from the possession of the assessee and one Shri Sarvajay Gupta on 22.05.2020.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The cash recovered by the police authorities was requisitioned u/s Page | 1 132A of the Act on 11.10.2021 by the Income Tax Department. Since, the assessee was not able to prove the ownership and source of the cash recovered and since, the same was not disclosed in the updated return filed by the assessee on 14.03.2022, the ld AO proceeded to treat the same as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee. The assessee preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte. Since, the appeal was decided ex parte by the ld CIT(A), we deem it fit and appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the ld CIT(A) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to furnish fresh evidences, if any, in support of its contentions. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21/03/2025.
More judgments on Section 132A
- Kishor Kumar Aggarwal, Gurgaon vs ACIT-Central Circle-30- Delhi., DelhiITA 2305/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Kishor Kumar Aggarwal, Gurgaon vs ACIT-Central Circle-30, DelhiITA 2304/DEL/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed7 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hira Enterprises, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward-9(2), HyderabadITA 2450/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Praveen Kumar Saini, Jhunjhunu vs Income Tax Officer Ward-1, JhunjhunuITA 325/JPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
- Himtaj Medicare, Delhi vs Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, DelhiITSSA 8172/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
