MR. SAROJ KAMAR SENAPATI,BHADRAK V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHADRAK WARD, BHADRAK

ITA 239/CTK/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Saroj Kumar Senapati, an individual engaged in wholesale rice business, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which was passed exparte due to his non-compliance with notices. The original assessment by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the year 2017-18 included substantial unaccounted cash deposits totaling Rs.99,27,624, which were treated as turnover with an estimated profit of Rs.7,94,210. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance with procedural notices. The Tribunal, considering the health issues and non-representation of the assessee, decided to restore the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705441 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.C.MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: B.R.PANDA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 142(1); 44AD

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE SHRI Saroj Kumar Senap Patharadi, Charampa, Bhad 756101 PAN/GIR No. AYCP (Appellant The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld.Addl/JCIT(A) CIT(A),Cuttack/10955/2019 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by assessee has filed condonation petition supported by an affidavit stating that due to frequent health problems, he could not consult the advocate about the order being passed by the ld CIT(A) passed by the ld CIT(A) is an exparte order and IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.239/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Saroj Kumar Senapati Patharadi, Charampa, Bhadrak, Vs. ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak AYCPS 1847 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri B.R.Panda, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 30/06/202 Date of Pronouncement : 30/06/202 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Mumbai dated 24/11/2023 IN Appeal No. /10955/2019-20 passed for Assessment Year The appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by assessee has filed condonation petition supported by an affidavit stating due to frequent health problems, he could not consult the advocate rder being passed by the ld CIT(A). Even otherwise, the order passed by the ld CIT(A) is an exparte order and the assessee was not P a g e 1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak Respondent) S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR /2025 /2025 The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against 24/11/2023 IN Appeal No. for Assessment Year 2017-18. The appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by 448 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition supported by an affidavit stating due to frequent health problems, he could not consult the advocate Even otherwise, the order the assessee was not ITA No.239/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 P a g e 2 | 4 aware of the same. He prayed that the delay in filing the appeal before the be condoned. Ld Sr DR opposed the condonation petition. 3. After hearing the parties and perusing the condonation petition, I am satisfied that the assessee had reasonable cause in not filing then appeal before the Tribunal within the stipulated time, therefore, I condone the delay of 446 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assesse is an individual carrying on rice business on wholesale basis filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 21.3.2018 disclosing net income at Rs.2,98,520/-. The case was selected for scrutiny on the alleged substantial cash deposits in the bank. The Assessing Officer noticed that the total cash deposit in two banks was Rs.99,27,624/-. Accordingly, the AO required the assessee to furnish the source of cash deposited in the bank by issuance of notice u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. However, the assessee has not complied with the notices. Even, the show cause notice was not complied with. As the assessee failed to produce all books of account, bills and vouchers in support of the expenditure, therefore, the genuineness of cash deposit in the bank was doubted by the AO. Hence, the AO treated the total credit in the bank of Rs.99,27,624/- as turnover and estimated the profit @ 8%, which comes to Rs.7,94,210/-. Thus, the estimated profit of ITA No.239/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 P a g e 3 | 4 Rs.7,94,210/- was treated as income under the head “profits and gains of business profession” and deduction claimed was not allowed. 5. On appeal, the ld CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non-compliance to the notices issued. Hence, the assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 6. At the time of hearing, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte without affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He further submits that the profit rate estimated by the AO by applying the section 44AD @ 8% is excessive considering the nature of business. He further submits that the matter be restored to the file of the CIT(A) and the assessee will comply with the notices for fresh adjudication. 5. In reply, ld Sr DR opposed the prayer of the assessee. 7. I have considered the rival submissions. It is an admitted fact that due to non appearance by the assesee before the CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal exparte and dismissed the appeal of the assesee. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that if an opportunity is given, he is in a position to substantiate his case before the ld CIT(A) as the ld CIT(A) has passed the order due to con-compliance of the notices. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice ITA No.239/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 P a g e 4 | 4 I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the CIT(A) without seeking any adjournment under any pretext failing which the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. The grounds raised by the assesee are accordingly allowed for statistical purpose. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/06/2025. Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) VICE PRESIDENT Cuttack: Dated 23/06/2025 B.K.Parida, Sr. PS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Asst.Registrar, Itat, cuttack 1. The Appellant : Saroj Kumar Senapti Patharadi, Charampa, Bhadrrak, 756101 2. The Respondent : ITO, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak 3. The Addl/JCIT(A)-,2, Mumbai 4. Pr.CIT-Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// "