SHRIPAL BAFNA,PROP. SHRI AUTO CARE GARIYAND V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 375/RPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shripal Bafna against an order from the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, which itself arose from an assessment order under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention in the appeal was the addition of Rs.10,45,000 to the assessee's income, deemed as unexplained cash credit. However, the tribunal dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds due to the excessive delay in filing the appeal and the absence of a condonation application, without delving into the merits of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469764 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 01-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 05-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ “एक-सदèय” मामला रायपुर मɅ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR Įी रवीश सूद, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 375/RPR/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shripal Bafna Prop. of Shri Auto Care, Gariyaband Road, Ward No.11, Shyamnagar, Rajim (C.G.)-493 885 PAN : AFAPB2014J .......अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 01.10.2024 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 08.10.2024 2 Shripal Bafna Vs. ITO, ward-1(1), Raipur ITA No. 375/RPR/2024 आदेश / ORDER PER RAVISH SOOD, JM: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, dated 25.08.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the A.O under Sec. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 19.12.2019 for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs.10,45,000/- on account of cash deposited in bank account by invoking Section 69A. Holding it to be unexplained cash credit. 2. That the addition made by A.O is arbitrary, illegal and is not justified. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any grounds before or at the time of hearing” 2. As is discernible from the record, the assessee in the memorandum of appeal filed in Form 36 before the Tribunal had acknowledged the service of the order of the CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi on 25.08.2023 but had filed the present appeal beyond the prescribed time period. i.e. involving a delay of 286 days. As no application seeking condonation of the delay involved in filing of the present appeal had been filed with the Tribunal, therefore, a defect memo, dated 12.08.2024 was issued to the 3 Shripal Bafna Vs. ITO, ward-1(1), Raipur ITA No. 375/RPR/2024 assessee on 13.08.2024. Although the aforesaid defect memo as per record was served upon the assessee on 17.09.2024 but despite that the short coming/defect, therein pointed out, had not been met out by the assessee. For the sake of clarity, the relevant extract of the Form 36 is culled out, as under: 3. At this stage, it would be relevant to point out that the assessee had neither participated in the assessment proceedings, which, thus, had resulted in framing of the assessment vide order passed u/s. 144 of the Act, nor participated in the proceedings before the CIT(Appeals). 4. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am of the view that as the present appeals involves a delay of 286 days, as regards which, no application seeking condonation of the same had been filed before me, therefore, the present appeal in itself being not maintainable is liable to be dismissed on the said count itself. 4 Shripal Bafna Vs. ITO, ward-1(1), Raipur ITA No. 375/RPR/2024 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as not maintainable in terms of the aforesaid observations. Order pronounced in open court on 08th day of October, 2024. Sd/- (रवीश सूद /RAVISH SOOD) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर/ RAIPUR ; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 08th October, 2024. *****SB, Sr. PS. आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(Appeals)-1, Raipur (C.G) 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G) 5. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,रायपुर बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, Raipur Bench, Raipur. 6. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur. "