BANWARI LAL MISHRA,BHILWARA V. DCIT, AJMER

ITA 382/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sh. Banwari Lal Mishra, who appealed against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, which assessed his income at Rs. 4,00,00,000 for the assessment year 2018-19. This assessment was based on unexplained cash of Rs. 4,00,00,000 seized during a search operation. The CIT(A) upheld the assessment, leading to the appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. However, during the proceedings, the appellant decided to withdraw the appeal, leading to its dismissal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 28461 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 27-03-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALKA GAUTAM
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL PORWAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Period of limitation
• Section: 144; 143(3); 250; 132; 69A

Judgement Text

" vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ,o aJhujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 382JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.ko\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sh. Banwari Lal Mishra Harni Mahadev Road, Bhopalpura, Indra Colony, Bhilwara. cuke Vs. The DCIT, Ajmer. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: FUSPM5518N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Sunil Porwal, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Ms. Alka Gautam, CIT. lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing :21/10/2024 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 21/10/2024 vkns'k@ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, Judicial Member. On 10.01.2024, Learned CIT(A) passed order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act”), thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. 2. Said appeal was preferred by the assessee, feeling aggrieved by the assessment order dated 26.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer, in relation to assessment year 2018-19, u/s 144 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. 2 ITA No. 382/JPR/2024 Sh. Banwari Lal Mishra vs. DCIT Vide said assessment order dated 26.12.2019, the Assessing Officer assessed income of the assessee at Rs. 4,00,00,000/-. The ground for framing of said assessment was that the assessee had failed to explain cash to the tune of Rs. 4,00,00,000/-, seized from his possession on 29.03.2018, on the basis of warrant of authorization. Said cash was seized by ATS, Jaipur on 28.03.2018 in the area of Manoharpura Toll Durgapura, Delhi-Jaipur Highway and the ATS in turn informed Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department. 3. When the matter came up before Learned CIT(A) by way of appeal filed by the assessee, Learned CIT(A) was in agreement with the decision of the Assessing Officer as regards addition of Rs. 4,00,00,000/- made due to said undisclosed income, attracting the provisions of Section 69A of the Act, same having been seized during the search proceedings u/s 132 of the Act , but having remained unexplained. 4. That is how, the applicant-appellant preferred present appeal before this Appellate Tribunal. 5. After filing of the appeal, the assessee-applicant presented an application seeking condonation of delay in filing of said appeal. 6. In the application, the applicant-appellant alleged that the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) was received by him on 05.02.2024, and 3 ITA No. 382/JPR/2024 Sh. Banwari Lal Mishra vs. DCIT as such, the appeal filed on 27.03.2024 was presented within prescribed period of limitation. At the same time, the applicant-appellant requested for condonation of delay, if any. 7. With this application, the assessee-applicant also filed his affidavit dated 16.05.2024 reiterating the averment put forth in the application that the impugned order was received by him only on 05.02.2024. 8. It may be mentioned here that in the application as well as in the affidavit, the date of the impugned order has been mentioned as of 11.01.2024 whereas actually the order is of 10.01.2024. 9. It may be mentioned here that neither in the application nor in the accompanied affidavit the assessee-applicant has alleged mode of service of the impugned order i.e. whether it was served by email or by post or personally served or served on the portal or by any other mode. 10. Be that it may, respondent has neither opted to cross-examine the appellant-applicant nor placed on record any material to the contrary to suggest that the impugned order was never served on 05.02.2024. Having regard to all the facts and circumstances, we deem it a fit case to admit the appeal. 11. During pendency of the matter on 19.09.2024, Ld. DR sought adjournment for collection of information from the A.O as to whether any 4 ITA No. 382/JPR/2024 Sh. Banwari Lal Mishra vs. DCIT application was filed by anyone including the assessee-applicant for release of the seized currency, and also as regards a sum of Rs. 3,58,85,810/- which finds mentioned in the assessment order. 12. After Ld. DR received report dated 24.09.2024 from the AO, its copy was supplied to Ld. AR for the appellant-applicant. Thereupon, Ld. AR for the appellant-applicant submitted an application by email with the prayer that this appeal be dismissed having been withdrawn. 13. In the said application sent by email, Ld. AR for the appellant- applicant has clearly mentioned that the application has been filed after consulting the assessee. 14. In view of the above application from the appellant, this appeal is hereby dismissed as having been withdrawn. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 21/10/2024. Sd/- Sd/- ¼jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 21/10/2024 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfivxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 5 ITA No. 382/JPR/2024 Sh. Banwari Lal Mishra vs. DCIT 1. The Appellant- sh. Banwari Lal Mishra, Bhilwara. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- DCIT, Ajmer. 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 5. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 382/JPR/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar "