SHRI SHARAN SINGH , AMRITSAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 4 (5), AMRITSAR

ITA 390/ASR/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Sh. Sharan Singh, through his legal heir Harbhajan Kaur, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Amritsar. The appeal was directed against the addition of Rs. 34 lacs to the assessee's income, which was allegedly deposited in cash in a bank account during the financial year 2010-11. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) had made this addition under sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-appearance of the assessee and lack of explanation for the deposits. The CIT(A) upheld this addition in an ex parte order due to the absence of the assessee's representative. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to present his case and thus set aside the matter to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination and a speaking order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 114990 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 year(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-11-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 27-10-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.390/Asr/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 Sh. Sharan Singh Through Legal Heir (Harbhajan Kaur) H.No. 222-B, Opp. Octroi Che Vill. Daburji G.T. Road, Near Fauji Karyana Store, Amritsar. [PAN:-BRJPK1745F] (Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward-4(5), Amritsar. (Respondent) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh.Rajiv Wadhera, Sr.DR. Date of Hearing 10.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement 17.11.2022 ORDER Per:Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Amritsar, [in brevity the ld. CIT(A)] bearing appeal no.10343/2017-18, date of order 29.09.2018, the order passed u/s 250 (6)of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity the Act] for A.Y. 2010-11. The I.T.A. No.390/Asr/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 2 impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 4(5), Amritsar, (in brevity the AO), order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act date of order 17.11.2017. 2. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. The assessee was ill health and was unable to appoint the consultant for filing the appeal. After a detailed discussion, with the consent of the ld. Sr. DR, the delay of 175 days is condoned. 3. Brief fact of the case is that the addition was made on basis of depositing cash in the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Amritsar total amount of Rs.34 lacs. during this financial year. The assessee deposited cash in saving bank account Rs.34 lacs and Rs.2,50,000/- was a credit entry. The assessee was unable to submit the details of explanation related to deposit of cash before the ld. AO. The total amount was added back with the total income of the assessee with the interest from bank account Rs.32,2547/- which is worked out Rs.36,82,257/- (Rs. 34,00,000/- (+) Rs.2,50,000/- (+) Rs.32,257/-). The assessment was completed u/s 144 for non- appearance before the revenue authorities. The assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) by challenging the order of the ld. AO. The assessee had claimed that I.T.A. No.390/Asr/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 3 the income was from the agricultural income which was deposited in the bank account. But before the ld. CIT(A), none was present and ex parte order was passed in favour of the revenue. 4. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us. 5. During the hearing none was present on behalf of the assessee. The matter is taken up with the consent of the ld. Sr. DR for hearing proceedings. 6. We considered the submission of the revenue and the orders of both the revenue authorities. 6.1. The assessee had filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but without considering the ground in a very summary manner the order was passed exparte for non-appearance before the authority. Even the assessment folder was not verified by the appellate authority during passing the order. Without considering the ground of assessee the order was passed. After a thoughtful consideration, we find that the assessee should get another opportunity of hearing before the ld. CIT(A). The matter is set aside to the ld. CIT(A) for further adjudication with speaking order. The assessee should get a reasonable opportunity of hearing and allow to submit the evidence before the authority. I.T.A. No.390/Asr/2019 Assessment Years: 2010-11 4 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No. 390/Asr/2019 is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.11.2022 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. M. L. Meena) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) Accountant Member Judicial Member AKV Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order