RASHMITA SINGH,GWALIOR V. ITO, GWALIOR

ITA 293/AGR/2025

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 714259 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ AGRA (Through Physical/Virtual Hearing) BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.293/Agr/2025 [Assessment Year: 2009-10] Rashmita Singh, D-47, Phase-3, Garden Homes, Alkapuri, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh-474001 Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh-474001 PAN-AGFPS9495J Appellant Respondent Appellant by None (An Adjournment Application) Respondent by Shri Anil Kumar Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 06.08.2025 ORDER, PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM, This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against an order dated 27.12.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Ld. CIT(A), relating to Assessment Year 2009-10 arising out of order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to ‘the Act’) dated 30.11.2017. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, the assessee had filed an adjournment petition, which was rejected and the appeal is being Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.293/Agr/2025 decided after hearing the ld. Sr. DR and on the basis of material available on record. 2. There is a delay of 92 days in filing the appeal before us. In this regard, the assessee has filed a condonation application for condoning the delay, which is reproduced as below:- Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.293/Agr/2025 3. We have carefully considered the facts stated in the said application. Upon consideration, we are of the considered view that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in filing the said appeal. We, therefore, condone the delay of 92 days and admit this appeal for hearing. 4. Brief facts of the case:- The Assessing Officer had AIR information that the assessee had deposited a sum of Rs.12,81,701/- in her saving bank account during the Financial Year 2008-09 relating to Assessment Year 2009-10 maintained with ICICI Bank Gwalior in account No.xxxxxxxx4641. The Assessing Officer issued a notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2016 but according to the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not file any response. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee did not submit any explanation regarding the source of the cash deposited during the assessment proceedings and accordingly the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act and made an addition of Rs.12,81,701/-. The Assessing Officer further disallowed a claim of loss of Rs.98,283/- as according to the Assessing Officer, no details/documents were furnished by the assessee to substantiate the loss claimed. 5. Aggrieved with the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte as according to him, the case was fixed for hearing on four occasions when there was no response from the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) also observed on merit that Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.293/Agr/2025 in absence of any evidence to rebut the assessment order, there was no reason to interfere with the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. The Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 8. We have heard the ld. DR and supported the orders of the authorities below. In the ground no.4 of the appeal, it is submitted by the assessee that cash deposits of Rs.12,81,701/- in the bank account of the assessee is a joint account in the ICICI Bank with her husband who deals in the business of paints. It appears that this ground was not taken by the assessee either before the Assessing Officer or before the Ld. CIT(A). The above contention of the assessee requires factual verification. Therefore, in the given facts of the case, the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) are set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication on this issue after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and as per law. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 06th August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [SUNIL KUMAR SINGH] [BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 06.08.2025. f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ Copy forwarded to: Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.293/Agr/2025 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "