K.N. Dileep Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
No Escape from Compliance: ITAT Restores 69A Cash Deposit Addition for Fresh Hearing, Imposes Token Cost
Bangalore Tribunal in dealt with addition of unexplained cash deposits & condonation of delay. Assessee, engaged in trading of garnets & agricultural activities, had not filed his return of income for the year. Despite issue of notice u/s 142(1), there was no compliance. AO, therefore, proceeded u/s 144 & completed the best judgment assessment by determining total income at ₹1,00,62,955 comprising of unexplained money of ₹95,91,810 taxed u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE, business income of ₹4,40,834 & other income of ₹30,311. A demand of ₹1.15 crore was raised.
Even during appellate proceedings there was no response from Assessee. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte, holding that Assessee had failed to discharge his onus & relying on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Kale Khan Mohammed Hanif v. CIT (50 ITR 1), confirmed the additions.
On further appeal before Tribunal, there was a delay of 224 days. Assessee submitted an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay & contended that he was not conversant with technology & hence missed the communications sent through e-mail. He prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to represent his case. Revenue opposed condonation of delay as well as relief, contending that Assessee had been negligent at every stage.
