RAMU SONKAR,KOLKATA V. ITO, WARD-33(2), KOLKATA

ITA 164/KOL/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the revenue against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2018-2019. The primary issue was the addition of Rs.7,49,68,600 as income from undisclosed sources due to cash deposits, which was contested under Section 69 read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) had sustained this addition without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, who had not appeared before the appellate authority, resulting in an ex-parte order. The ITAT found that the assessee had not been adequately represented and thus remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126291 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B.SATYANARAYAN RAJU
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDHARTH AGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Income from undisclosed sources; National Faceless Appeal; HRA; Statistical purposes; Affirmed
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “डी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.164/KOL/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) Ramu Sonkar 132, AJC Bose Road, Sealdah, Kolkata-700014 Vs ITO, Ward-33(2), Kolkata PAN No. :AKUPS 5278 E (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri B.Satyanarayan Raju, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 27/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 21/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM : This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order dated 09.09.2024, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. At the outset, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeal is barred by 52 days for which the assessee has filed condonation application along with affidavit of the assessee affirming therein that the assessee is not in habit of accessing emails on regular basis and he depends on the accountant for the same including the coordination with the tax consultant. The assessee affirmed in the affidavit that the assessee could not comply with the notice as accountant was on leave and it was only in the first week of January when the notice regarding recovery of outstanding demand was received in email, the assessee ITA No.164/KOL/2025 2 came to know that ex-parte order having already been passed. Accordingly, the appeal documents were prepared and filed before the ITAT on 21.01.2025 with a delay of 52 days. 3. After hearing the rival contentions of the parties and perusing the contents of the affidavit, we are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal is for bonafide and sufficient reasons and accordingly delay of 52 days is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is taken for adjudication. 4. The sole issue involved in the appeal of the assessee is with regard to the addition made by the AO of Rs.7,49,68,600/- on account of cash deposits treating the same as income from undisclosed sources by wrongly invoking the provisions of Sectiion 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, which has also wrongly been sustained by the ld. CIT(A) without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. On perusal of both the orders of the lower authorities, we find that the assessee could not furnish the details as claimed before either of the authorities below. Even before the ld.CIT(A), the assessee did not appear resulting into ex-parte order being passed by the appellate authority. The assessee could not explain the cash deposits in the bank account maintained with UCO Bank ,Sealdah Branch, Kolkata. Since the assessee has not represented his case before the first appellate authority and the ld. CIT(A) has also passed the order ex-parte, therefore, we are of the view that to meet the end of justice, the issue involved in the present appeal requires re-adjudication at the end of the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, ITA No.164/KOL/2025 3 we restore the issue to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 21/04/2025. Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) Sd/- (RAJESH KUMAR) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 21/04/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गाडड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// "