KESHRAM,VILLAGE- PATWARI vs. THE ITO WARD- 5(2)(1), G BUDH NAGAR, GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 10.01.2024, for Assessment Year 2017-18.

The appeal is time barred by 53 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit. After perusal of same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, but is for the reasons (A.Y.2017-18) stated in the condonation petition which appears to be bonafide. Hence, delay in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing on merits.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an agriculturist. No return of income was filed by the assessee for AY 2017-18 either u/s. 139 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) or in response to notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act. Based on information received under Operation Clean Money, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs.10,37,000/- during demonetization period. Total credits of Rs.72,21,995/- were reflected in assessee’s Punjab National Bank account. Despite statutory notices issued u/s.142(1) of the Act and show cause u/s 144 of the Act, there was no compliance by the assessee. Consequently, the AO framed assessment u/s 144 of the Act, treating total sum of Rs.72,21,995/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A), but remained unsuccessful. Hence, the present appeal.

Shri Om Prakash, representing the department, supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that sufficient opportunities were allowed to the assessee but the assessee deliberately opted not to comply with the notices.

We have heard the submissions made by ld. DR and have examined the orders of authorities below. It is seen that the AO issued several notices u/s 142(1) and 144 of the Act which remained uncomplied. Similarly, the CIT(A) issued multiple notices dated 05.03.2020, 24.02.2021, 06.12.2023, and 20.12.2023; however, the assessee neither filed any substantive reply nor produced evidence to explain the source of cash deposits. We observe that the appeal before the Tribunal has been filed by the legal heir of Shri Keshram, the assessee. However, it (A.Y.2017-18) is not emanating from records as to when Keshram died. Considering facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to explain source of cash deposits before the AO. Accordingly, the impugned order sustaining addition of Rs.72,21,995/- is set aside and the matter is restored back to the AO for denovo assessment.

The AO shall serve notice to the assessee/LR of the assessee through speed post on the residential address provided in Form No. 36 for sending of notice i.e. Village Bisrakh, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh 203207. The assessee upon service of notice shall respond to the same, without fail.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Thursday the 24th day of July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िद�ी/Delhi, �दनांक/Dated 21/10/2025 NV/- �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/The Appellant , 1. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 2.