MRS. SAJEENA IBRAHIM KALEEL L/R OF LATE MOHAMMED YAHYA MOGRAL CHOOTARAVALAP,MANGALORE V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MANGALURU

ITA 1660/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Mrs. Sajeena Ibrahim Kaleel, who appealed against the order of the ld. CIT(A) concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issue arose from the addition of substantial cash deposits made during the demonetization period, which the Assessing Officer (AO) attributed to unexplained sources under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte as no representative appeared due to the assessee's serious illness. Subsequently, the assessee passed away, and the legal heirs were unaware of the CIT(A)'s order until approached by the department for recovery. The tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to these circumstances and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing for the legal heirs.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34091 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GANESH R GALE; STANDING COUNSEL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNAIANA BHATIA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

"ITA No.1660/Bang/2024 Mrs. Sajeena Ibrahim Kaleel, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1660/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mrs. Sajeena Ibrahim Kaleel L/R of Late Mohammed Yahya Mogral Chootaravalap D.No.20-7-433, Shanthi Mahal Hamilton Complex Near D.C. Office Mangaluru 575 001 PAN NO : AAHPY2290H Vs. ITO Ward-1(1) Mangaluru APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Smt. Sunaiana Bhatia, A.R. Respondent by : Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing counsel for department Date of Hearing : 07.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.01.2025 O R D E R PER PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 27.3.2024 and relates to assessment year 2017-18 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1063453695(1). 2. There is a delay of 93 days in filing the appeal for which the counsel of the assessee has drawn the attention of the bench towards condonation application duly supported with affidavit filed in support of the same. It is the contention of the assessee that the assessee expired on 8.1.2023 and the ld. CIT(A) passed the order on 27.3.2024 i.e. much after the death of the present assessee. The counsel for the ITA No.1660/Bang/2024 Mrs. Sajeena Ibrahim Kaleel, Mangaluru Page 2 of 4 assessee pointed out that the order of ld. CIT(A) has been sent to the deceased email, which was not accessed by the legal heir of the assessee and they came to know about the order only when the department pursued for recovery. 3. The ld. D.R. strongly opposed the contention of the assessee. 4. After hearing both the parties, we observe that there is an ordinate delay of 93 days in this case. We are of the view that the circumstances as narrated by the counsel for the assessee constitute reasonable cause and hence, we condone the delay happened in filing the appeal before us. 5. Brief facts of the case as coming out from the orders of authorities below are that the assessee is an individual and has filed its return of income on 7.12.2018 declaring an income of Rs.2,76,680/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny on the ground that substantial cash was deposited by the assessee during demonetization period. The ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings issued questionnaire to the assessee, asking the details of the source of cash deposited by the assessee in its Allahabad Bank, Mangalore. The assessee in response to the questionnaire filed its reply. However, the AO, dissatisfied with the reply of the assessee added the entire deposits of cash u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”). 6. Aggrieved with the order of AO, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on 11.3.2020. However, no one appeared before the ld. CIT(A), as the assessee was seriously ill. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A), dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without dealing with the merits of the case. ITA No.1660/Bang/2024 Mrs. Sajeena Ibrahim Kaleel, Mangaluru Page 3 of 4 7. Now the assessee has come up in appeal before us. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that matter may kindly be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) because the assessee was expired during the pendency of appeal before the CIT(A). 8. Ld. D.R. relied upon the orders of authorities below. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We observe that in this case, the assessee expired on 8.1.2023, as evident from the death certificate annexed with the appeal memo. The order of ld. CIT(A) is of date 27.3.2024 which means when the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) were pending, the assessee has already expired. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The legal heir of the assessee would appear before the ld. CIT(A) and file the written submission along with documentary evidences in support of their claim. And the Ld CIT(A) will decide the matter afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, that ld. CIT(A) would grant proper and meaningful opportunity to the legal heir of the assessee before passing any order. 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 9th Jan, 2025 Sd/- (Waseem Ahmed) Accountant Member Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated 9th Jan, 2025. VG/SPS ITA No.1660/Bang/2024 Mrs. Sajeena Ibrahim Kaleel, Mangaluru Page 4 of 4 Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. "