SEEMA PAPPU YADAV,ANDHERI WEST V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAUTILYA BHAVAN

ITA 5483/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Seema Pappu Yadav, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which was passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appeal was initially delayed by 362 days, but the delay was condoned by the Tribunal. The primary issue arose from the reassessment under section 148 of the Act, where the AO added the purchase price of a property amounting to Rs. 52 lakhs and a cash deposit of Rs. 14,96,900 to the assessee's income, citing unexplained sources. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-prosecution. During the Tribunal's proceedings, new evidence was presented, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826412 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASSESSEE VIRAT C DOSHI; REVENUE SWAPNIL CHOUDHARY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No.5483/Mum/2025 Seema Pappu Yadav INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A No.5483/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Seema Pappu Yadav A/49, Laxmi Govind Apartment J P Road, Four Bungslows, Andheri West, Mumbai PAN : ABMPY7611G vs Income-tax Officer Ward 41(1)(4), Kautilya Bhavan BKC, Mumbai-400 051 APPELLANT RESPONDENT Present for Assessee Shri Virat C Doshi Present for Revenue Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. AR Date of hearing 24/12/2025 Date if pronouncement 07/01/2026 O R D E R Per: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, JM: The instant appeal of the assessee was filed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter called, ‘Ld.CIT(A)’] passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2011-12, date of order 20/06/2024. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Ld. Income-tax Officer, Ward 31(3)(3), Mumbai (for brevity, the “Ld. AO”), order passed U/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act, date of order 12/12/2018. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.5483/Mum/2025 Seema Pappu Yadav 2. The registry informed that the appeal was filed with a delay of 362 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condoning the delay in filing appeal. The Ld.DR had made no strong objection in condoning the delay. We considered that there is sufficient cause for delay in filing appeal before the Bench. The Ld. DR has not made any strong objection for condoning the delay in filing appeal. So, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and the matter is taken for adjudication. 3. We heard the rival submissions and considered the documents available on record. The Ld.AR argued and stated that the assessee’s case was reopened u/s 148 of the Act. But assessee was unable to comply with the notices issued by the Ld.AO. The Ld.AO added the amount of purchase price of the property of Rs.52 lakhs, as the source was not duly explained before the Ld.AO. Accordingly, the entire purchase consideration amount to Rs.52 lakhs and the cash deposit in bank account of Rs.14,96,900/- was added back with the total income of the assessee. The aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). But before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee was remained non-compliant. So the appeal was dismissed for non prosecution. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. During the appellate proceedings before the Bench, the Ld. AR submitted the deed of conveyance relating to the purchase of the said property, copies of the bank statements, and the relevant financial statements along with the computation of income of the assessee as evidence of the source of investment. However, these documents had not been filed or examined before any of the statutory authorities at the assessment or appellate stages. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that the matter be restored to Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.5483/Mum/2025 Seema Pappu Yadav the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. 5. The Ld. DR relied upon and supported the orders of the revenue authorities. 6. In our considered view, we find that the assessee’s addition was made for transaction of property amount to Rs.52 lakhs and cash deposit amount to Rs.14,96,900/-. At both the assessment stage as well as the appellate stage, the assessee remained non-compliant. We observe that the source of investment was duly explained before the Bench, and the ld. DR raised no objections to the submissions made by the ld. AR. We refrain from expressing any views on the merits of the case to avoid prejudicing the reassessment proceedings. Both parties have agreed to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. AO. It is imperative that the Ld. AO provides the assessee with a fair and adequate opportunity of being heard during the reassessment proceeding. Any evidence or explanation submitted by the assessee in her defence must be admitted and considered by the Ld. AO, who shall adjudicate the matter on its merits in accordance with the law. Similarly, the assessee is expected to act diligently and cooperate fully during the reassessment proceedings. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No. 5483/Mum/2025 is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 07/01/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (PRABHASH SHANKAR) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dt : 07/01/2026 Pavanan Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.5483/Mum/2025 Seema Pappu Yadav Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ/The Appellant , 2. ि◌तवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु CIT 4. ि◌वभागीियितिनध, आय.अपी.िअध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 5. गाडफाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBAI Printed from counselvise.com "