Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee is an individual running a dairy business who filed an appeal after a significant delay of 536 days. The assessee failed to appear before the lower authorities (AO and CIT(A)) to explain cash deposits during demonetization.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. Considering the assessee's submission that the deposits related to milk sales, the case was restored to the AO for verification of evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the issue of cash deposits during demonetization needs to be restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Balraj Singh, Vs ITO, M/s Mother Dairy Milk Agency, Ward-1, Near Annapurna Shopping Plaza, Sonipat. Meham Road, Gohana, Distt. Sonipat, Sonipat, Haryana. PAN: BJXPS0778Q (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee by : Shri Naveen Gupta, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.10.2025 ORDER
PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 12.10.2023 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No.CIT(A), Rohtak/11204/2019-20 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 25.12.2019 passed u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward-1, Sonepat (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).
At the outset, the ld. AR has pointed out about the delay in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal running into 536 days for which an application for condonation along with the affidavit have been filed on the basis that there was no physical service of the order. Considering that the assessee is an individual who has shown his income to be on the basis of running a dairy business, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
Further, we find that before the ld.CIT(A) and also before the AO the assessee has failed to appear and defend the deposit of cash during the demonetization period for which it is submitted by the assessee that being a Mother Dairy milk agency operator the amounts credited and debited are all out of the stocks sold which may be verified.
In the light of the aforesaid, we consider it an appropriate case to restore the issue to the files of the AO to give the assessee an opportunity for filing relevant evidences explaining the source of transactions and pass an order afresh. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.