MAHADEVI YALLINGAPPA DALAVAYI,GOKAK V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 GOKAK, GOKAK

ITA 18/PAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Mahadevi Yallingappa Dalavayi against the order of the CIT(A) which sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition pertained to unexplained cash deposits amounting to Rs. 20,97,500 in the assessee's bank account, which were discovered during a limited scrutiny of the assessee's return for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee claimed that these deposits were proceeds from the sale of agricultural land, but the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanations provided, leading to the addition. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, prompting the assessee to appeal to the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712438 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RIJULA UNIYAL.
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH UDADAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. Nos. 18/PAN/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) Mahadevi Yallingappa Dalavayi H.No.191/3, Basavanagar, Gokak-591307, Karnataka. Vs . I T O Ward(1), Dr Ghogeri Building, Belgaum Road, Gokak-591307, Karnataka. PAN .No. BWXPD2154E (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by Shri.Mahesh Udadar.AR Revenue by Smt.Rijula Uniyal. Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing 28.07.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement 29.07.2025 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of the NFAC Delhi/CIT(A) passed u/sec 143(3) and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition u/sec 69A of the Act made by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assesse has filed the return of income for A.Y.2017-18 on 2.08.2017 disclosing a total income of Rs.3,10,660/- and the case was selected for limited scrutiny under the CASS. The Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA. No. 18/PAN 2025. Mahadevi Yallingappa Dalavayi. Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information from ITBA data found that, the assesse has made cash deposits in the savings bank account with Corporation Bank Gokak aggregating to Rs.20,97,500/- in the F.Y.2016-17 and the notice u/sec143(2) and u/sec142(1) of the Act are issued to furnish the details and sources of cash deposits. The assesse has filed the explanations and details mentioning the sources and particulars of sale of agricultural lands situated at pamaldinni village for a consideration of Rs.20,87,000/- on 14-03-2016 dealt at Para 4 & 5 of the order. Whereas the A.O was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt on the provisions of the Act and made addition u/sec69A of the Act of Rs.20,97,500/- and also made addition of rental income of Rs.1,97,940/-and finally assessed the total income of Rs.26,06,100/- and passed the order u/sec 143(3) of the Act dated 25.12.2019. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts, submissions of the assessee and findings of the AO but has sustained the action of the A.O and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA. No. 18/PAN 2025. Mahadevi Yallingappa Dalavayi. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings. The Ld.AR mentioned that the CIT(A) has not dealt on the details, documents, confirmation and evidences filed in the appellate proceedings to substantiate the sale of agricultural lands and prayed for allowing the appeal. The Ld.AR supported the submissions with the factual paper book. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A). 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue envisaged by the Ld.AR that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the addition u/sec69A of the Act without providing proper opportunity and overlooking the facts and material evidences. The assesse has filed all the details before the lower authorities and the CIT(A) has not considered the documents and information supporting the claim of the assesse. Prima-facie, the CIT(A) has dealt on the findings of the AO and has not considered the submissions/evidences of the assesse filed in the proceedings referred and has not allowed the grounds of appeal. Therefore, we considering the overall facts, circumstances and principles of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing and accordingly restore the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits and the CIT(A) Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA. No. 18/PAN 2025. Mahadevi Yallingappa Dalavayi. shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee should also cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of the appeal and the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 29/07/2025 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA. No. 18/PAN 2025. Mahadevi Yallingappa Dalavayi. Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member PS 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. PS 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed Printed from counselvise.com "