MOHAMMED SAJID KHAN,KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 40(1), KOLKATA

ITA 2442/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mohammed Sajid Khan, the appellant, who contested the addition of unexplained cash deposits to his income for the assessment year 2015-16. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) had added a sum of ₹1,84,53,690 as unexplained cash deposits based on information from the AIMS module, which showed substantial cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The assessee did not initially file a return of income, leading to proceedings under section 147 of the Income Tax Act. After the ITO's assessment, the assessee appealed to the CIT(A), which was dismissed due to non-prosecution as the assessee failed to appear, attributed to his serious illness. The Tribunal noted the procedural fairness and the assessee's right to be heard, thus remitting the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708385 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'बी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA श्री जॉजज माथान, न्याधयक सदस्य एवं श्री राक ेश धमश्रा, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 2442/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mohammed Sajid Khan Vs. I.T.O., Ward-40(1), Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: ARVPK0524B Appearances: Assessee represented by : None. Department represented by : Kapil Mandal, Addl. CIT (DR). Date of concluding the hearing : 16-June-2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 18-July-2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2015-16 dated 28.08.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 03.05.2023. Page | 2 I.T.A. No.: 2442/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mohammed Sajid Khan. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 2 days. An application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under: “The Return for the A/y-2015-16 was taken for scrutiny. Your Appellant has filed the requisite paper and documents as requisitioned vide notice u/s 142(1) on various dates. The assessee also submitted Cash Book, Sales Register, Stock Summary, Balance Sheet & Profit & Loss A/c and sample copy of sales Bill along with computation of income to substantiate his cash deposits in the bank accounts. The Ld. Assessing Officer without considering the facts of the case added the cash deposits with the total income of the assessee and taxed accordingly. Being aggrieved the assessee filed Appeal before the Ld. CIT (A). But unfortunately the assessee fallen ill after submitting the Appeal. He was so serious that he was asked to take full bed rest. His position was very much serious. During his acute illness the Appeal case was fixed for hearing and the assessee could not represent his case before the Ld. CIT (A), though the Ld. Commissioner has given three chances to present his case. The Ld. CIT (A) has dismissed the Appeal on 28.08.2024 due to non appearance of the Appeal. The assessee was little bit recovered in the month of November-2024. He is now after going through the case wants to take next legal step by filing the Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Assessee is submitting herewith his all treatment records to your good self. In the above course he is late by about one month in filing the Appeal before your honour. On the above circumstances your Appellant's earnest request to your honour to go through the records and be kind enough to Condone the delay in filing the Appeal and accepts the Appeal and give the Assessee a chance to be heard.” 1.2. As the impugned appeal order dated 28.08.2024 was communicated on 10.09.2024, the appeal filed on 02.12.2024 is late by 2 days and not by one month as stated by the assessee. However, considering the application for condonation of delay and the reasons Page | 3 I.T.A. No.: 2442/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mohammed Sajid Khan. stated therein, we are satisfied that the assessee had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant appeal within statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the ld. A.O had wrongly drafted the order by making addition of cash deposited even though proper cash book and other documents are submitted and the assessee is to be given a chance to be heard. 2. That the opportunity may be provided to produce the documents to proof the genuine reason of cash deposited, because due to illness of the assessee appeals not represented. 3. That your assessee carves leaves to add or alter and modify the grounds of appeal before or at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that information had been obtained from the AIMS module that the assessee had deposited cash to the tune of ₹1,84,53,690/- in his savings bank account during the FY 2014-15. The assessee did not file the return of income. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') initiated proceeding u/s 147 of the Act and a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. In response to the notice issued, the assessee filed the return of income showing total income of ₹2,69,680/-. The Ld. AO considered the returned income of ₹2,69,680/- u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act and added a sum of ₹1,84,53,690/- as unexplained cash deposited and assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹1,87,23,370/-. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. Further, aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. Page | 4 I.T.A. No.: 2442/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mohammed Sajid Khan. 4. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and the appeal was heard with the assistance of Ld. DR. 5. We have noted that the appeal has been decided ex parte, primarily on account of non-prosecution on behalf of the assessee as the notices issued were not complied with. Therefore, we deem it appropriate in the interest of justice and fair play that another opportunity needs to be provided to the assessee to represent his case properly before the Ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the appeal to him to be decided afresh, who shall allow an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also grant an opportunity of representing the case and be heard to the Ld. AO as per rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, if required, and thereby pass an order in accordance with law. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18th July, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [George Mathan] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 18.07.2025 Bidhan (Sr. P.S.) Page | 5 I.T.A. No.: 2442/KOL/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mohammed Sajid Khan. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Mohammed Sajid Khan, 1, Nawab Badruddin Street, Chittaranjan Avenue (S.O.), Kolkata, West Bengal, 700073. 2. I.T.O., Ward-40(1), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata. 6. Guard File. //True copy // By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches Kolkata "