LALBA KRUSHNASINH VAGHELA,GANDHINAGAR V. THE ITO, WARD 2, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1938/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which had confirmed the addition of Rs.10,23,000 as unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The primary contention was the dismissal of the assessee's appeal by the CIT(A) due to an inordinate delay of 1965 days in filing the appeal, attributed to the death of the assessee's husband during the COVID-19 pandemic, who previously managed her tax affairs. The Tribunal considered the circumstances of the delay and the merits of the case, ultimately deciding in favor of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 822868 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 14-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVINDRA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRADEEP TULSIAN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदा बा द \u0013ा यपीठ एस.एम.सी’, अहमदा बा द । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD \u001aी संजय गग , \u0013ा ियक सद क े सम!। Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं /ITA No. 1938/Ahd/2025 िनधा \u000fरण वष\u000f /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela Plot no. 1068, Sector-2-D, Gandhinagar, Gujarat – 382 007 बनाम/ v/s. ITO Ward 2, Gandhinagar – 382 001 \u0013थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AKQPV 8914 N (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Pradeep Tulsian, AR Revenue by : Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 22/12/2025 आदेश/O R D E R The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 12/08/2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. 2. The assessee, in this case, has contested the confirmation of addition of Rs.10,23,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1938/Ahd/2025 Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela Vs. The ITO Ward 2 Asst. Year: 2012-13 2 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited my attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee being bared by limitation. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that there was a delay of approximately 1965 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). A separate application for condonation of delay was filed before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) considering the inordinate long delay in presenting the appeal, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The assessee has filed a separate affidavit before this Tribunal also, wherein, the reason for delay in filing the appeal has been explained. It has been submitted in the affidavit that, earlier, the husband of the assessee used to look into her income-tax matters. That during Covid-19 pandemic, her husband passed away on 30/04/2021. That assessee being a house-hold lady was not aware of the present income-tax proceedings pending before the AO. That when the tax consultant received the order of the ITAT in an another appeal, only then he noted from the income-tax portal and got the knowledge of the assessment order for the year under consideration. He then informed the assessee of the assessment order passed for the year under consideration. The assessee immediately took corrective steps and filed the appeal before the Ltd. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that though the Ld. CIT(A) has mentioned in the order that in Form No.35, the assessee, herself, has mentioned the date of service the order, but factually that was not correct as due to the specific software requirement of the income-tax department, that picks up the data of service of notice as mentioned in the record /software of the income-tax authorities and it does not allow to mention a different date of service of notice. Therefore, the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee, herself, has mentioned the service of notice as Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1938/Ahd/2025 Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela Vs. The ITO Ward 2 Asst. Year: 2012-13 3 05/12/2019 was not due to the fact that the assessee had actually become aware of the passing of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), rather the date has been picked up by the software, itself, of the income-tax portal. 5. The Ld. DR has submitted that there is an inordinate long delay of more than 5 years in this case and that the explanation given by the assessee is general in nature. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee being barred by limitation. 6. We have heard the rival contentions of the Ld. Representatives of the parties and gone through the record. Though, there is an inordinate long delay of more than 5 years in this case, however, the facts and circumstances on the file shown that the assessee being a house-hold lady, her husband was looking out the income-tax matters, who has passed away during Covid-19 pandemic on 30/04/2021. It can be well understood that after the death of her husband, the assessee lady might have been left alone and there might be so many responsibilities falling upon her shoulders. The assessee has duly explained that she was not aware of the income-tax proceedings for the year under consideration and that it was only when the order of the Tribunal was sent by the consultant appointed by her husband and he further looked about the other matters showing on the portal and only then he came to know about the passing of the impugned assessment order, which he further informed to the assessee. The assessee, therefore, explained the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. On merits, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has demonstrated that the assessee had withdrawn a sum of Rs.59 lakhs on 06/04/2011 from her bank Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1938/Ahd/2025 Lalba Krushnasinh Vaghela Vs. The ITO Ward 2 Asst. Year: 2012-13 4 account for the purpose of repayment of the amount on account of some cancellation of sale agreement of land. He has further demonstrated that after the withdrawal of the said amount on 04/04/2011, there was minor deposits of Rs.10,000/- on 18/04/2011. He has further demonstrated that remaining deposit of Rs.11,13,000/- was made in the month of September-2011, which was out of the amount, left as cash in hand with the assessee after settling the matter of payment relating to cancellation of earlier sale agreement. I find that there was huge withdrawal of Rs.59 lakhs on 06/04/2011 and the deposits in the month of September-2011 can very well be assumed that the same was out of the cash left with the assessee out of earlier withdrawal. Therefore, the assessee has very well proved on the file the source of the deposits. Therefore, I do not find justification the part of the lower authorities in making the impugned addition and the same is, accordingly, ordered to be deleted. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 22/12/2025. Sd/- ( Sanjay Garg ) Judicial Member अहमदाबाद/Ahmedabad, िदनांक/Dated 22/12/2025 टी.सी.नायर, व.िन.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS आदेश की %ितिलिप अ)ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीला थ$ / The Appellant 2. %+थ$ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु- / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु-)अपील (/ The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi 5. िवभा गीय %ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,अहमदा बा द /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. 6. गा ड फा ईल / Guard file. आदेशा नुसा र/ BY ORDER, स\"ािपत #ित //True Copy// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "