Case Number: ITA 991/DEL/2021
Appellant: Raman Kumar, Meerut
Respondent: ITO, Ward-2(2), Meerut
Assessment Year: 2010-11
Result: 2010-11
Case Filed on: 2021-08-17
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2021-11-24
Pronounced on: 2021-11-24
This case involves an appeal filed by Raman Kumar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Appellant’) against the ex-parte order dated 18.09.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Meerut, for the assessment year 2010-11. The appeal centers on the addition of Rs. 32,54,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the reassessment order passed under section 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as well as the validity of the reassessment proceedings.
The appellant is a non-filer of income tax returns. Based on the Annual Information Report (AIR) received, it was found that the appellant had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 32,54,000/- in his savings bank account with Oriental Bank of Commerce. Consequently, the AO reopened the assessment by issuing a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after recording reasons for the reassessment.
Despite multiple notices issued under sections 148, 142(1), and 144 on various dates, the appellant failed to appear or comply with the statutory requirements. As a result, the AO completed the assessment under section 144, determining the total income of the appellant at Rs. 32,54,000/-, considering it as unexplained cash deposits.
The appellant did not appear before the CIT(A) despite several opportunities being provided. Consequently, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order, sustaining the addition made by the AO and upholding the validity of the reassessment proceedings.
Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the appellant filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench. The appellant’s counsel, Shri Vinod Goel, argued that the entire deposit made in the bank was out of agricultural income and trading activities. He requested the Tribunal to provide the appellant with an opportunity to substantiate his claims, as no notice under section 143(2) was issued.
The Departmental Representative (DR), Shri Om Parkash, supported the order of the CIT(A) but expressed no objection if the matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.
The Tribunal, comprising R.K. Panda, Accountant Member, observed that due to non-appearance of the appellant before the AO and non-compliance with statutory notices, the assessment was completed under section 144. The total income was determined based on the unexplained cash deposits in the appellant’s savings bank account.
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) upheld the AO’s action in an ex-parte order due to the appellant’s repeated non-appearance. The Tribunal also considered the appellant’s submission that given an opportunity, he could substantiate the cash deposits of Rs. 32,54,000/- as being from agricultural income and trading activities.
In the interest of justice, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to restore the issue to the AO, directing him to provide one final opportunity to the appellant to substantiate his case. The Tribunal instructed the appellant to appear before the AO and present his case without seeking adjournments, failing which the AO could pass an appropriate order as per the law.
Based on the above observations, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing the AO to grant the appellant a final opportunity to substantiate his claims regarding the cash deposits.
Order: The appeal of the Appellant is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 24th November, 2021.
-Sd/- (R.K. Panda, Accountant Member)
Date: 24.11.2021
Copy forwarded to:
Assistant Registrar
ITAT, New Delhi
Raman Kumar vs. ITO: Unexplained Cash Deposits for Assessment Year 2010-11
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform