NAVEET SHARMA,VILL.NAGABAG P.O.BANDROL vs. ITO WARD KULLU, KULLU

आदेश/ORDER

PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT

This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2017-18 against the order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the ld. CIT(A)

NFAC, Delhi. The following grounds have been taken :

“1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), ex-parte which is bad in law and against the principles of natural justice. 2. The Ld. CTT(A) has erred in taw and Facts by confirming the addition of Rs. 30,28,000/- on account of the same being the cash deposits made from undisclosed sources owing to the fact that ITA 744/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 2 the sources of the deposits of the said amount are genuine and duly explainable.”

2. There is a delay of 16 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay explaining the reasons for the delay occurred in filing the present application. The contents of the application for condonation of delay are reproduced hereunder :

5. That in this way there has been a delay of 15 days beyond the due date at there had been no intention from my side to jeopardize the interest revenue by delaying the process of the filing of appeal. '

The Affidavit in this respect from the counsel has been attached at Annexure”

ITA 744/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 3 4. From the contents of the application, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. Even otherwise, the assessee cannot be said to stand to gain anything by deliberately delaying the filing of the appeal before this Tribunal.

Therefore, the delay of 16 days in filing the present appeal is condoned.

The AO noticed that the assessee had deposited huge cash in ‘old currency notes’ in his bank accounts during the demonetization period in PNB Mohali in four different bank accounts which were not disclosed in the return of income for assessment year 2017-18. The AO issued specific questionnaire alongwith statutory notice u/s 142(1) of the Act on the ITBA Portal on 14.08.2019. No submission was made by the assessee. The AO issued notices u/s 142(1) online on 27.09.2019, 18.10.2019 and 12.11.2019 to submit the requisite replies. In response, the counsel of the ITA 744/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 4 assessee CIT(A) Krishan Joshi filed incomplete reply on 16.11.2019. After that, assessee was again issued Show Cause Notice dated 29.11.2019. In response, the counsel of the assessee filed reply but the AO was not satisfied with the reply of the assessee, therefore, AO made addition of Rs.30,28,000/- u/s 69A of the Act to the total income of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 and taxed the same @ 60% u/s 115BBE of the Act.

6. The assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) issued various notices through ITBA Portal fixing the hearings on 24.01.2021, 06.07.2022, 10.07.2023, 11.08.2023 and 29.08.2023, but no submissions were uploaded by the assessee on ITBA Portal. Accordingly, considering the submissions of the assessee as given in the Statement of Facts, the ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order and confirmed the addition of Rs.30,28,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of cash deposits made from undisclosed sources.

5. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

ITA 744/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 5 were issued on the ITBA Portal. Merely uploading of information about the date of hearing on the Income Tax Portal is not an effective service of notice as per the provisions of Section 282 of the Income Tax Act. The matter now stands covered by the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of ‘Munjal BSU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Ludhiana through its authorized signatory Shri Bharat Goyal Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Chandigarh’, in CWP 21028-2023 (O&M), wherein, vide order dated 04.03.2024, their Lordships have held that the provisions of Section 282(1) of the Income Tax Act and Rule 127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, envisage that it is essential that before any action is taken, a communication of the notice must be in terms of these provisions; that these provisions do not make mention of communication to be “deemed” by placing the notice on the e-portal of the Department; that an pragmatic view has always to be adopted in these circumstances; that an individual or a company is not expected to keep the e-portal of the Department open all the times so as to have knowledge of what the Department is supposed to be doing with regard to the submissions of forms, etc.; and that the principles of ITA 744/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 6 natural justice are inherent in the Income Tax provisions and the same are required to be necessarily followed.

Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the file is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A).

Order pronounced on 01.07.2024.