MANJU DEVI BEGANI,SURAT V. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 2(1)(3), SURAT

ITA 789/SRT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Manju Devi Begani, the appellant, contesting the orders of the Income Tax Officer (ITO) regarding additions made to her income for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The ITO had made additions on account of disallowance under Section 14A and alleged bogus agricultural income under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) dismissed her appeal due to a procedural delay in filing, which was later contested. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had erred by not considering the reasons for the delay and the merits of the case, leading to the remand of the case for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 790537 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEERAJ SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: RASESH SHAH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice; Bogus
• Section: 68; 14A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT (HYBRID MODE) BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.789/Srt/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Manju Devi Begani, 6A, Sai Ashish Society, University Road, Surat-395007 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(3), Surat [PAN No.ACTPB1367Q] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Respondent by: Ms. Neeraj Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 02.12.2025 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE - JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi on 23.05.2025 for A.Y. 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject the learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay in filing the same without appreciating the fact that there was no delay in filing the appeal of the assessee as the assessee had originally filed appeal manually in time on 02.05.2016 but subsequently again filed the e-appeal electronically in view of amendment in IT, Rules which mandated the e-filing of appeal. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. assessing officer has erred in making an addition of Rs. 2,23,207/- on account of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld. assessing officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 76,24,846/- on account of bogus agricultural income as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 789/Srt/2025 Manju Devi Begani vs. ITO Asst. Year –2013-14 - 2– 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Ld, assessing officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 11,43,727/- @ 15% of addition made of agricultural income of Rs.76,24,846/- on account of bogus agricultural expenses treated as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act. 5. It is therefore prayed that additions made by the assessing officer may please be deleted. 6. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in course of hearing of the appeal.” 3. The assessee filed return of income on 27.03.2014 declaring total income at Rs. 17,88,980/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act dated 09.09.2014 was issued on questionnaire along with notice dated 18.11.2015 was also issued to the assessee. The Authorised Representative of the assessee contended the assessment proceedings and furnished the details. The assessee derived income from agricultural and interest income during the year under consideration. After going through the details the Assessing Officer made disallowance under Section 14A to the extent of Rs. 2,23,207/- and also made addition on account of bogus agricultural income to the extent of Rs. 87,68,573/- under Section 68 of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) without taking cognizance of the assessee’s reply has dismissed, the appeal of the assessee only on the ground of the delay. The Ld. AR submitted that there is only the delay of 35 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. AR prayed that the delay may be condoned and the matter may be referred back to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues on merit. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 789/Srt/2025 Manju Devi Begani vs. ITO Asst. Year –2013-14 - 3– 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) despite receiving the assessee’s reason for delay has totally ignored the same, hence, the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) is condoned. The CIT(A) has totally ignored the merits of the assessee’s submission and has passed non-speaking order. Therefore, the issue contested by the assessee in the appeal before the CIT(A) are remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication and verification of all the issues. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced under proviso to Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 02/12/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 02/12/2025 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत / DR, ITAT, Surat 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत / ITAT, Surat 1. Date of dictation 01.12.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 02.12.2025 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .12.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .12.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 02.12.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 02.12.2025 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order…………………….. 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "