Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee made a cash deposit of Rs. 25,90,500/-, which was treated as unexplained by the AO and CIT(A) due to non-compliance and failure to submit supporting documents. The assessee claimed the deposit was from land sale but could not provide evidence to the lower authorities.
Held
The tribunal set aside the order and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was allowed to submit new documents under Rule 46A, and the CIT(A) could seek a remand report from the AO and address legal issues raised by the assessee.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was the unexplained cash deposit and the assessee's inability to provide evidence of its source (sale of land) to the lower authorities, leading to an ex parte order.
Sections Cited
Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US & SHRISANJAY AWASTHI
आदेश /O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 05.08.2024, passed by Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. In this case, the Ld. AR pointed out that due to a communication gap between the assessee and his tax consultant, no compliance could be made before the Ld. AO and thus, an ex parte order was passed by him. The assessee could not succeed before the Ld. CIT(A) also as apparently the assessee could not submit any documents in support of his claim that the impugned cash deposit of Rs.25,90,500/- was made out of sale of land.
ARUN KUMAR 1.1 The assessee has challenged the action of the authorities below and also stated that there were several legal infirmities in the exercise of jurisdiction by the Ld. AO.
1.2 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. We find that the Ld. AR has filed considerable documents before us to justify the impugned amount. However, we find that such documents do not find any mention in the orders of the authorities below. On a query from the Bench, the Ld. AR stated that such documents could not be filed before any of the authorities below. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand the same back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee would be at liberty to file any documents in his favour under Rule 46A and the Ld. CIT(A) would be at liberty to call for a remand report from the Ld. AO.The Ld. CIT(A) would also adjudicate on the legal issues raised by the assessee.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11.02.2026