SHRI MOHAMMAD AMIN SOFI,SRINAGAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SRINAGAR

ITA 358/ASR/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Mohd. Amin Sofi against the order of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi, which was based on an ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO, Ward 2, Srinagar under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment included unexplained cash deposits during the demonetization period amounting to Rs. 11.86 lakhs. The appeal was initially delayed due to the assessee's health issues and lack of communication from his tax consultant. The Tribunal found the delay in filing the appeal to be non-intentional and allowed the appeal to be heard on merits. The Tribunal also accepted the additional evidence presented by the assessee, which had not been previously submitted to the lower authorities, and remanded the case for a detailed examination of these documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 786708 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 14-06-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (HYBRID COURT) BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mohd. Amin Sofi, 1st Floor, Sheikh Computer. Sher Chawok Khanyar, Srinagar J & K 190003 [PAN: DGSPS 2919M] (Appellant) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Srinagar. (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by : : Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone, C.A. Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : : 13.10.2025 21.11.2025 ORDER Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi dated 30.11.2023 passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has emanated from the order of the AO, Ward 2, Srinagar passed u/s 144 of the Act, 1961 dated 22.12.2019. Printed from counselvise.com 2 I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that this appeal is filed belatedly by 122 (One hundred twenty-two) days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating the fact that the order of the ld. first appellate authority dated 30.11.2023 has not been received by the assessee physically by post, and it was not known to the assessee that the said order has been served or issued through e-filing portal, because the assessee being illiterate, was not able to operate any computer system, or even his smart phone and is entirely dependent on the tax consultant, who never informed or intimated the assessee regarding the order of the ld. first appellate authority being passed ex-parte. Subsequently, when he has been informed by his tax consultant some time in the month of May, 2024, the assessee took necessary steps to appoint his new counsel who helped him to file the appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal which was filed on 14th June, 2024, belated by 122 days. He further submitted that the assessee was also at fault in not being able to pursue his lawyer earlier because of his lumber disc herniation problem and was advised bed rest by the doctors who has also resulted in this delay. The assessee prayed for condonation of the delay and for admission of the appeal to be decided on merits. 3. The Ld. DR has no objection on the issue of condonation Printed from counselvise.com 3 I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 4. Considering the medical issues put forth by the assessee and also considering the non-cooperation of his earlier counsel, we find that the delay is not intentional or willful in nature and we condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. Brief facts emerging from the records are that the assessee has deposited cash in his bank account during the demonetization period amounting to Rs. 11.86 lakhs and in absence of any return being filed in response to notice u/s 142(1) of the Act, the assessment has been completed ex-parte u/s 144 on a total income of Rs. 14.02 lakhs (including Rs.11.86 lakhs u/s 69A of the Act being the deposit of SBN and Rs.2.15 lakhs being the business profits calculated @ 8% of the remaining deposits in bank account). 6. The matter caried in appeal has been dismissed by the ld. first appellate authority in absence of any response to notice dated 25.11.2021, 10.11.2022 and final show cause notice on 14th July, 2023, without adjudication on the grounds contained in Form No. 35 on merits of the case. 7. Before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee, submitted documentary evidences containing bank statements of Jammu & Kashmir Bank where the cash has been deposited by the assessee during the demonetization period along with the copy of cash book for the entire financial year generated from the computer system, along with the copies of the balance sheet and computation of income and submitted that the Printed from counselvise.com 4 I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 assessee is engaged in the business of bakery products and has disclosed the total cash receipts over the entire financial year in the cash book which is also the explanation of deposits of cash in bank account during the demonetization period, which is come out of sale proceeds of such bakery products. However, he was fair enough to admit that all documents are fresh evidence which has never been produced before the lower authorities and has made an application for acceptance of additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, and has prayed for an opportunity of producing the said documentary evidences before the lower authorities for examination of the same. 8. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) but has no objection, if the matter is remanded back to the files of the ld. first appellate authority for adjudication on merits of the case after examination of supporting documentary evidences. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record and we find that the cash deposit in bank during the demonetization period by a business concern needs to be explained by production of cash book which the assessee has filed before us, (pg. 5 to 15 of paper book), (cash book entries during demonetization period are made part of this order as under): Printed from counselvise.com 5 I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Printed from counselvise.com 6 I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 We find that the opening of cash balance as on 01.11.2016 was Rs.8.84 lakhs and there are cash deposits in bank as well as receipts against sales recorded in such cash book for the period of 1st November, to 8th November but the balance of cash as on 08.11.2016 is not recorded. 10. However, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded back to the files of the ld. CIT(A) for consideration of all the materials and evidences on record and we direct the assessee to file copies of the cash book along with the supporting documentary evidences to explain the source of cash deposit in bank during the demonetization period and to fully cooperate in appellate proceedings, and necessary report may be obtained from A.O. regarding fresh evidence as per provisions of law. 11. The assessee will be allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard. 12. We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case. 13. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 21.11.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: Printed from counselvise.com 7 I.T.A. No. 358/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order Printed from counselvise.com "