AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:
This appeal is filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act', for short), relevant to the Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ for short) 2020-21.
As there was no representation on behalf of the assessee, we hereby proceed to dispose of this appeal by hearing the Ld. DR and on perusal of the material available on record.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
“1.Because, the order of learned lower authority is bad in law & against the facts and circumstance of the case.
2.Because learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that due to continuous illness assessee could not present his case before ld. AO as well as before CIT(A) in the exceptional circumstances.
3.Because, ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the validity of notice u/s 148, which is issued mechanically without any enquiry, verification of information etc. sheerly to conduct roving enquiries only and is beyond jurisdiction.
4.Because, without prejudice to above, in alternative on merits,ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,72,46,593/- u/s 69A being the unexplained money in whole disregard of the material on record in as much as when transactions are duly recorded in book of accounts and are in the nature of business.
5.Because, ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that addition is made without discharging onus by ld. AO hence the same was made only on the basis of surmises and conjectures.
6.That the appellant craves leave to add add/alter any/all grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.
Therefore, it is very respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the orders of ld. lower authorities with the directions as deemed fit.”
The brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and has filed his return of income declaring total income at 12,68,980/-. The assessee’s case was reopened u/s 147 of the Act based on the information received under e-Verification Scheme, 2021 indicating high risk transactions and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. The assessee filed his return of income in response to the same declaring the same income as that of the returned income. The Ld. AO observed that there was substantial amount credited in the various bank accounts of the assessee aggregating to Rs.2,72,46,593/- during the year under consideration for which various details were sought for from the assessee. The assessee was non-compliant during the assessment proceedings and, hence, the Ld. AO passed the assessment order dated 17.03.2025 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act determining the total income at Rs.2,85,15,573/-, after making an addition of Rs.2,72,46,593/- as unexplained money under Section 69A of the Act on the ground that the assessee has failed to substantiate the nature and source of the credits along with documentary evidences.
Aggrieved, the assessee was in appeal before the First Appellate Authority, who, vide order dated 28.01.2026, upheld the addition made by the Ld. AO on the ground that the assessee though had filed party-wise details along with partial details, the assessee was unable to corroborate his plea that the credits pertained to the business receipts with cogent documentary evidences. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us challenging the order of the Ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the assessee has challenged the addition made by the Ld. AO and upheld by the Ld.CIT(A) along with the legal ground challenging the validity of notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, which is an additional ground raised before us for the first time as the assessee has not challenged the same before the Ld.CIT(A) as per the grounds reproduced in the Ld.CIT(A)’s order. Since there was no application filed by the assessee for admission of the additional grounds, we do not deem it necessary to adjudicate upon the same.
With regard to the merits of the addition, the assessee has raised a ground that due to continuous illness, the assessee was unable to present his case before the Ld. AO as well as before the CIT(A). It is further observed that the assessee is said to have filed partial details before the Ld.CIT(A) with regard to the credits found in his bank accounts and since the assessee has not complied before the Ld. AO as the same was a best judgement assessment passed under Section 144 of the Act, we deem it fit to remand this issue to the file of the Ld. AO for extending the assessee one more opportunity to present his case before the Ld. AO by adhering to the principles of natural justice and in the interest of justice dispensation. The assessee is directed to strictly comply with the proceedings before the Ld. AO and the Ld. AO shall pass a de novo assessment order after duly considering the submission and documentary evidences, if any, filed by the assessee, in accordance with the law and on the merits of the case. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are hereby allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.