AVALAMURTHY SHIVA KUMAR,BENGALURU RURAL V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3), BENGALURU

ITA 593/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Avalamurthy Shiva Kumar, the appellant, who faced an ex-parte assessment order under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2015-16. The Income Tax Department had information about a cash deposit of Rs.98,46,500 in the appellant's Axis Bank account, with no corresponding income tax return filed. Despite multiple opportunities given to the appellant to explain the source of the deposit, there was no response, leading to the addition of the amount as unexplained money under section 69A and the application of section 115BBE. The appellant's subsequent appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a significant delay, which the CIT(A) found lacked reasonable cause. The appellant then approached the tribunal, which condoned the delay and remitted the case back to the AO, imposing conditions on the appellant regarding cooperation and evidence submission.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773424 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2025
• Other Referred Cases: ITA No.866/Bang/2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MADHUSUDHAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.593/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Shri. Avalamurthy Shiva Kumar, RajaghattaRajaghatta Post, Doddaballapura Tk, Bangalore Rural – 561 203. Karnataka. PAN : BATPA 2333 N Vs. ITO, Ward – 7(2)(3), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Madhusudhan, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.09.2025 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : This appeal is filed by the assessee is against the Order passed by the CIT(A) vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065440452(1) dated 06.06.2024. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per information received by the Income Tax Department, during the impugned Assessment Year, assessee has deposited cash of Rs.98,46,500/- in Axis Bank account but there was no return of income filed by the assessee. In this regard, after following due procedure, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. The AO provided numerous opportunities to the assessee but there was no reply from the assessee’s side. Finally a show cause notice was issued Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.593/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 3 on 02.02.2023 proposing addition of the cash deposited in the Axis Bank account and still there was no response. The bank statement was collected from the bank after issue of notice under section 136 of the Act to the bank and it was found that there was cash deposit of Rs.98,46,500/-. For want of explanation from the assessee’s side, the entire cash deposit was treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and section 115BBE of the Act was applied and Order was passed on 22.02.2023 under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. 3. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A) on 20.12.2023 with a delay of 273 days and the assessee filed reason for delay in filing appeal. The reasons have been extracted by the learned CIT(A) in his Order and the CIT(A) did not find any reasonable cause in filing the appeal belatedly before him. After relying on some judgments, he dismissed appeal of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 201 days. In this regard, assessee has fled affidavit which is placed on record. Accordingly, we are condoning the delay before the learned CIT(A) relying on the Order of the Tribunal in ITA No.866/Bang/2024, Order dated 31.10.2024. The learned Counsel submitted that the assessee is a petty contractor and doing small civil works in the remote area and he is not conversant with the income tax proceedings. 5. Considering the rival submissionsfrom both the sides, we noted that the Assessment Order has been passed ex-parte for want of representation from the assessee’s side, as well as the learned CIT(A) has passed ex-parte Order. Considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we are remitting this issue back to the file of AO with a cost of Rs.5,000/-. Assessee has to pay Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.593/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 3 the cost and produce necessary evidence to the AO before taking up the case. Assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. In case of failure no second leniency shall be granted. It is ordered accordingly. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page. Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore. Dated: 26.09.2025. /NS/* Copy to: 1. Appellants 2. Respondent 3. DRP 4. CIT 5. CIT(A) 6. DR,ITAT, Bangalore. 7. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. Printed from counselvise.com "