SHRI SAJID BASHIR KHAN,SRINAGAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

ITA 302/ASR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sajid Bashir Khan, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, which was based on the order of the AO, Ward-3, Srinagar. The primary issue was the rejection of the appeal by the first appellate authority due to non-payment of advance tax and non-submission of return, as per section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant had deposited a significant amount of cash during the demonetization period, which was subject to scrutiny and resulted in an ex parte assessment. The tribunal found merit in the appellant's request for a fair opportunity to present his case regarding the non-liability to pay advance tax and remanded the matter back to the first appellate authority for a detailed examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784359 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHARAN DASS
• Assessee Lawyers: BASHIR AHMAD LONE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 302/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sajid Bashir Khan, Iqbalabad Bemina Srinagar, Jammu & Kashmir. [PAN:-BXXPK6247E] (Appellant) Vs. ITO, Ward (1), Srinagar. (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone CA Respondent by Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.11.2025 ORDER Per: Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, passed u/s 250 of the Act, 1961 vide order dated 29.02.2024 which has emanated from the order of AO, Ward-3, Srinagar, passed u/s 144 of the Act, vide order dated 20.12.2019. 2. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the Registry that this appeal is filed belatedly by 1 day. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 302/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2 2.1 In course of hearing the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the appeal has been dispatched by post on 17th May, 2024 from Srinagar J & K which has reached the office of the tribunal on 20th May 2024 resulting in delay of 1 day and he asked for condonation of the same. Considering the negligible delay, we condone the same and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 3. The assessee has taken six grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 and his grievance is mainly due to the fact that the ld. First appellate authority has rejected the appeal without adjudicating on the ground contained in the memorandum of appeal, by refusing to admit the appeal for non-payment of advance tax as per provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs.20.70 lakhs in J & K Bank A/c during demonetisation period and in absence of any return on record, and in absence of any response to various notices issued u/s 142(1) of the Act, the assessment was completed ex parte on a total income of Rs.37.58 lakhs (which include addition u/s 69A amounting to Rs.20.70 lakhs being the SBN deposit in bank (plus) the estimation of business profits of Rs.16.88 lakhs being the 8% of the balance deposit in bank account). 5. The matter is carried in appeal before the ld. First appellate authority has been dismissed without admitting the said appeal on the issue of non-payment of advance tax coupled with non-submission of return thereby violating the provisions of section 249(4)(b) of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 302/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 3 6. The ld. AR, in course of hearing submitted that the assessee is engaged in the trading business and the deposit of cash in the bank a/c are out of his sale proceeds from the said business. He further submitted that out of the total addition made by the AO on account of SBN deposits amounting to Rs.20.70 lakhs, only, an amount of 4.47 is lakhs deposit of old currency and the balance are all new currency notes as certified by the bank authorities. 6.1 He further submitted that before rejection of the appeal u/s 249(4)(b), the ld. CIT(A) has not allowed an opportunity to the assessee to explain his case and his contention is that if proper opportunity is allowed he will prove with evidence on record that no advance tax is payable by the assessee u/s 210 of the Act, in the instant case and as such, he prays for fair opportunity of hearing to prove his case. 7. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) but has no objection if the matter is remanded back to the file of the ld. First appellate authority for considering the issues on merits. 8. We have heard the rival submissions and considered the materials on record and we are of the opinion that in the interest of justice will be served if the matter is remanded back to the file of the first appellate authority where the assessee is to be allowed an opportunity to explain with documentary evidences that the assessee is not liable to pay advance tax u/s 210 of the Act 61 and the provisions of section 249(4)(b) can be waived. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 302/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 4 8.1 As such, we remand the matter back to the files of the ld. First appellate authority where the assessee will explain with reasons the absence of liability of the assessee u/s 210 and thereafter on satisfactory explanation of the same, the ld. First appellate authority are proceed to dispose of the appeal on all the grounds contained in Form No. 35 on merits of the case. 8.2 The assessee will get a reasonable opportunity of being heard and notice to be issues u/s 282 of the Act 61 and in the e-mail id provided in Form 35. 9. We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case, and all legal issues are left open. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 14.11.2025 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (UDAYAN DASGUPTA) Accountant Member Judicial Member AKV Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order Printed from counselvise.com "