Rameshbhai Jashubhai Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
ITAT Ahmedabad dealt with a case where AO made addition of ₹18,55,500 as unexplained cash deposit u/s 69 after Assessee failed to respond to notices issued in reassessment u/s 147. CIT(A) dismissed Assessee’s appeal solely on the ground of 621-day delay without examining merits.
Before Tribunal, Assessee explained being 60% handicapped, totally dependent on others, & unable to access proper legal assistance, which resulted in ex-parte orders at both stages. Tribunal accepted that the delay was not deliberate & that consultant’s failure should not prejudice a disabled Assessee. Considering principles of natural justice, Tribunal set aside both orders & remanded the matter to AO for fresh adjudication after proper verification of evidence relating to cash deposits from business receipts of Sankalp Corporation. Assessee was directed to fully cooperate. Appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), ADDL/JCIT(A)-11, Mumbai on 13.09.2024 for A.Y. 2016-17.
2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:
“1. Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-11 Mumbai has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal and he further erred in not deciding the appeal on merits of the case.
2. Ld. Addl./Jcit (A)-11 Mumbai has erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 18,55,000 made by Ld. A.O. for cash deposited in bank a/c u/s 68 of the Act. In as much as, the said cash is deposited out of business receipt of proprietary concern of assessee “Sankalp Corporation”.”
3. The return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 declaring total income at Rs. 2,33,090/- was filed by the assessee on 31.03.2017. As per the information received from investigation the Revenue initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act and notice under Section 148 dated 18.03.2019 was served upon the assessee. No reply was filed by the assessee to the statutory notices and therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 18,55,500/- as cash deposit with HDFC treating the same under Section 69 of the Act.
