Madhuri Vishnu Dadure Vs ITO (ITAT Nagpur)
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Nagpur, considered an appeal arising from an assessment made under Sections 147 read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2015-16. The assessee challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who had dismissed the appeal and upheld an addition of ₹87,15,000 made as unexplained cash deposits under Section 69A of the Act.
The assessee had filed a return declaring income of ₹3,62,440. Based on information that cash deposits of ₹87,15,000 had been made in a bank account, reassessment proceedings were initiated through a notice under Section 148. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that party-wise sales details were not readily available and that purchase details were being collected. A show-cause notice proposing addition of the cash deposits as unexplained money was issued. Although the assessee furnished certain records, including purchase and sale registers and bank statements, the Assessing Officer held that complete supporting evidence explaining the source of the deposits had not been produced and consequently added the entire amount under Section 69A.
Before the Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee raised a legal objection contending that the notice under Sections 148 and 148A(d) had been issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) rather than the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), allegedly contrary to CBDT Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the objection, relying on Section 124(3), and upheld the addition, observing that the assessee had failed to satisfactorily explain the source of the cash deposits.
