GURMELO DEVI,JAGADHARI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, YUMNANAGAR

ITA 1170/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the Assessee, Gurmelo Devi, against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC Delhi concerning the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary contention revolves around the assessment made under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, which treated cash deposits of Rs.80,00,000 as undisclosed income. The Assessee argued that the assessment was made without proper application of mind and was based solely on information from the investigation wing. The initial appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance with Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, as the Assessee had neither filed her return nor paid the advance tax as determined by the AO. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the claim of genuine hardship, decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 707154 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 30-11-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY JAIN; C.A
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 68; 69

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “ए” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE ŵी लिलत क ुमार, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी क ृणवȶ सहाय, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1170/Chd/ 2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Gurmelo Devi H.No. 378 Village Kail Haryana-135003 बनाम The ITO Yamunanagar ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: DKLPD2247C अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ajay Jain, C.A राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 08/07/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 08/07/2025 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC Delhi dt. 29/01/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. At the outset the Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation by 244 days. 3. After considering the condonation application filed by the assessee, we condone the delay for which sufficient cause is shown, and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. In the present appeal Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. Assessing Officer has wrongly frame d the assessment u/s 144 of the ACT. 2. Learned A.O has made lump sum addition Rs 8000000/ treating entire cash deposits as undis closed Income which is contrary to Law, as th e cash deposit in a bank account could not be tr eated a s taxable income u/s 69 of the Act. 2 3. That A.O. acting under information from inves tigation wing no independent application of m ind not amount to formation of belief. Is bad-i n-law. 4. That Ld. ITO has wrongly initiated penalty pro ceedings u/s 271(1)(c), 271(1)(b) AND 271F o f the Income Tax A ct,1961. 5. The Assessee reserves the right to amend, alter , add, and withdraw any ground of appeal. 5. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessment was reopened under Section 148 of the Act based on AIR/CIB/NMS information regarding cash deposits in the assessee’s bank account. The assessment was completed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Act, treating total cash deposits of Rs.80,00,000/- as unexplained income under Sections 68 and 69 of the Act. The Ld. AO assessed the income and raised a demand of Rs.66,26,980/-. 5.1 It is the case of the assessee that due to the serious illness and subsequent unfortunate demise of her nephew Mr. Mukesh Kumar, she was under considerable mental stress and unable to effectively participate in the assessment proceedings or guide her authorized representative. This resulted in an ex parte assessment order being passed against her. 6. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), which was dismissed on the ground of non-compliance with Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. It was noted that the assessee had neither filed her return nor paid the advance tax as determined by the AO. Despite deficiency notices issued in January 2024, no rectification or exemption request was filed by the assessee, leading to dismissal of the appeal in limine. 7. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), which was dismissed on the ground of non-compliance with Section 249(4)(b) of the Act. It was noted that the assessee had neither filed her return nor paid the advance tax as determined by the AO. Despite deficiency notices issued in January 2024, no rectification or exemption request was filed by the assessee, leading to dismissal of the appeal in limine. 3 8. In the present appeal before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the circumstances leading to the assessee’s non-compliance were beyond her control and prayed for one final opportunity to present her case on merits. It was urged that justice would be better served by setting aside the assessment and providing the assessee a fair hearing. 9. Per contra, the Ld. DR opposed the request and submitted that repeated opportunities had already been granted at earlier stages, and the assessee’s failure to respond demonstrated non-cooperative conduct. It was argued that such conduct should not be lightly condoned and costs may be imposed if remand is considered. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and carefully perused the material available on record. While the technical dismissal under Section 249(4)(b) is legally sustainable, we find that the substantive issues raised in the assessment order have not been adjudicated on merits. In the interest of justice and fair play, and considering the claim of genuine hardship made by the assessee, we are of the considered view that the matter deserves a fresh look. 10.1 Accordingly, we set aside the assessment order and the appellate order and restore the entire matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Ld. CIT(A) shall provide the assessee an opportunity to explain the source of cash deposits and other relevant matters. A reasoned and speaking order shall be passed after considering the submissions and evidence produced by the assessee. We also direct the assessee to comply with the applicable provisions of law for prosecuting the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), including fulfilling the requirement of Section 249(4)(b) of the Act, if and when such appeal is revived or refiled. It is also expected that the assessee shall not seek undue adjournments and shall cooperate in the early disposal of the appeal. 4 10.2 We make it clear that all issues are kept open, and Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the matter independently without being influenced in any manner by any of the observations made by us in this order, which are only for the limited purpose of remand. However, taking note of the default in earlier proceedings and the judicial time consumed, we direct the assessee to deposit a cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) in the PM CARES Fund within 30 days from the date of this order. Proof of deposit shall be furnished to the AO during fresh proceedings. 10.3 The appeal is accordingly allowed for statistical purposes with the above directions. 11. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08/07/2025 Sd/- Sd/- क ृणवȶ सहाय लिलत क ुमार (KRINWANT SAHAY) (LALIET KUMAR) लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL MEMBER AG आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar "