RASHIDA BEE,JAORA CHOUPATI V. CIT(A), RATLAM

ITA 916/IND/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Rashida Bee, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A), Ratlam, which upheld the assessment order treating a cash deposit of Rs.16,00,000 during the demonetization period as unexplained money under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant contended that the amount represented income from agricultural activities, which was not substantiated with documentary evidence at the CIT(A) level. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the assessment process, specifically the failure to send notices to a valid email address, which hindered the appellant's ability to participate in the assessment proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 716984 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 25-12-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH PORWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SOUMYA BUMB
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 148; 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 7 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इंदौर Ɋायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 916/Ind/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rashida Bee, S.O. Jaora, Ratlam बनाम/ Vs. CIT(A), Ratlam (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN: BKEPB1322F Assessee by Shri Soumya Bumb, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 18.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1069934600(1) dated 25.10.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18 Printed from counselvise.com Rashida Bee ITA No. 916/Ind/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 2 of 7 and the corresponding previous year period is from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX 2.1 That as and by way of an assessment order made u/s 144 of the Act, the total income of the assessee was computed and assessed at Rs.16,00,000/-. That the aforesaid assessment order bears No.ITBA/AST/S/144/2019-20/1018386091(1) and that same is dated 27.09.2019 which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”. The case pertains to the period of demonetization from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. The assessee had deposited cash of Rs.15 lakhs in his Axis Bank Ltd account at Jaora in M.P. The bank reported to the department that total deposit is of Rs.16 lakh. The amount of Rs.16 lakh was treated u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 2.2 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid “Impugned Assessment Order” prefers first appeal u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “Impugned Order” has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The core ground and reason foe dismissal of 1st appeal was as under:- Printed from counselvise.com Rashida Bee ITA No. 916/Ind/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 3 of 7 “During the course of appeal proceedings, the appellant has submitted the submission and same has been perused carefully. It is stated by the appellant that the said cash amounting to Rs.16,00,000/- represents agriculture activities. In respect of the same, the appellant has not submitted any documentary evidences for her contention. It is also noted that the appellant has not filed any return of income u/s 139. I am agreeing with the view of the Assessing Officer and the contention of the appellant remained unjustified and unsubstantiated. Hence, the ground is noted as dismissed”. 2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid “Impugned Order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and has raised following grounds of appeal in Form No.36 against the “Impugned Order” which are as under:- “S.148 – Invalid jurisdiction On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case under section 148 of the Act. The appellant prays that the impugned proceedings initiated be held as void and directed to be quashed. S.147 – Reassessment On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in reopening the case under section 148 of the Act. The appellant prays that the said notice and consequent assessment be declared as void and bad in law and directed to be quashed. S.69A – Against alleged unexplained money On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred upholding the addition of cash deposits of Rs.16,00,000/- under Section 69A of the Act. The appellant prays that the said addition be directed to be deleted. Printed from counselvise.com Rashida Bee ITA No. 916/Ind/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 4 of 7 S.69A – Violation of principles of natural justice On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.AO erred in not considering the evidences available on records and arbitrarily making the addition. The appellant prays that the addition so made be directed to be deleted. 246 – Reservation of right. The appellant craves leave to add, amend any or all grounds at the time of hearing.” 3. Record of Hearing 3.1 That the hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 18.08.2025 when the Ld. AR for and on behalf of the assessee interalia contended before us that the “Impugned Assessment Order” is passed in the violation of the principles of natural justice as no adequate and full opportunity was afforded to the assessee. In so far as the “Impugned Order” is concerned it was contended that it has wrongly upheld the “Impugned Assessment Order” as sum of Rs.16 lakh as assessed and computed is derived from carrying out agricultural activities. However before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee could not produce the relevant evidence in support of her agricultural activities. In order to support his above arguments the Ld. AR has placed on record of this Tribunal a paper book containing pages 1 to 4. Basis paper book page 1 & 2 he has demonstrated that the notice(s) Printed from counselvise.com Rashida Bee ITA No. 916/Ind/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 5 of 7 u/s 142(1) & 144 of the Act dated 06.09.2019 and dated 16.09.2019 respectively were addressed by the Ld. A.O to a blank e-mail address, therefore assessee could not participate in the original assessment proceedings before the Ld. A.O and no material and evidences in support of income being agriculture income could be filed. The Ld. AR stated that if the “impugned order” is set aside then before the Ld. A.O he undertake to file the necessary and requisite documents relating to agriculture land, crop pattern, etc. Hence prayed for an opportunity before the Ld. A.O. Basis paper book page 3 & 4 the Ld. AR demonstrated that part compliance was done before the 1st appellate authority. Ld. DR appearing for and on behalf of the revenue contended that revenue has no objection if the entire issue is relegated back to the file of Ld. A.O for fresh adjudication on merits. 4. Observations & findings & conclusions 4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and proprietary of the “impugned order” basis records of the case and the contentions canvassed before us. 4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case. Printed from counselvise.com Rashida Bee ITA No. 916/Ind/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 6 of 7 4.3 We basis records of the case and after hearing and upon examining the rival contentions are of the considered view that in so far as the “Impugned Assessment Order” is concerned the assessee has been able to establish basis paper book (supra) that no e-mail notice(s) ever came to him consequently he could not make compliances before the Ld. A.O. Hence we find the “Impugned Assessment Order” as ex-parte one. In so far as the “Impugned Order” is concerned the assessee has demonstrated basis paper book part compliance before the Ld. CIT(A). 4.4 During the course of the hearing the Ld. AR has undertaken to file necessary documents before the Ld. A.O in support of agricultural activities carried out by the assessee to establish that income is derived from agriculture. The Ld. AR has concurred with the submission of the Ld. AR. 4.5 In view of the above premises drawn up by us we set aside the “Impugned Order” and relegate the issue back to the file of Ld. A.O for fresh adjudication on denovo basis. Assessee is directed to file all documents, papers, evidences in support of agricultural activities before the Ld. A.O. Printed from counselvise.com Rashida Bee ITA No. 916/Ind/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 7 of 7 5. Order 5.1 In result the “Impugned Order” is set aside as and by way of remand back to the file of Ld. A.O on denovo basis. 5.2 The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open court on 22.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI) (PARESH M JOSHI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Indore िदनांक /Dated : 22/08/2025 Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "