Varun Kumar Jain Vs ITO (ITAT Chandigarh)
ITAT Chandigarh held that return filed on 23.9.2019 for F.Y. 2016-2017 was barred by limitation thus appeal filed dismissed as the base of the appeal i.e. return was invalid. Thus, appeal dismissed.
Facts- Assessee is an individual and he did not file his return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 despite making cash deposits in his bank account during the demonetization period. AO issued notices u/s 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 requesting the Assessee to file return of income but he Assessee did not file any return of income in response to notices issued by AO. During the assessment proceedings, AO provided many opportunities to the Assessee to explain the nature and source of deposits made during the demonization period, however, the Assessee did not gave any satisfactory explanation during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, the AO completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act making an addition of Rs. 12,34,000/-as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and Rs. 2,98,080/- was further added as per computation of income filed by the Assessee.
Conclusion- The return filed by the Assessee on 23.9.2019 was barred by limitation because for F.Y. 2016-17, the last date of filing of the return was on 31.3.2018 but despite notices issued by the Assessing Officer, the Assessee did not file any income tax return before that date. Therefore, the written submissions filed by the Assessee on 23.9.2019 may not be taken for these proceedings. The Counsel of the Assessee accepted that the written submission was not filed in time despite notices received from the A.O., therefore, the return filed on 23.9.2019 was an invalid return.
