Lack of awareness of Income Tax assessment proceedings u/s 148: ITAT remands matter with penalty [Read Order]
The tribunal observed that in the interest of justice, the matter should be remanded for reconsideration, allowing the assessee to submit additional evidence
![Lack of awareness of Income Tax assessment proceedings u/s 148: ITAT remands matter with penalty [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Income-Tax-assessment-ITAT-remands-Income-Tax-assessment-proceedings-taxscan.jpg "Lack of awareness of Income Tax assessment proceedings u/s 148: ITAT remands matter with penalty [Read Order]")
The Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) remanded the matter directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] to reconsider additional evidence for additions made under Sections 68 and 69 of the Income Tax Act. Shri Syed Zubair Pasha, (assessee) engaged in the business of stone trading, had cash deposits amounting to Rs. 24,20,224/- in his bank account...
The Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) remanded the matter directing the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] to reconsider additional evidence for additions made under Sections 68 and 69 of the Income Tax Act.
Shri Syed Zubair Pasha, (assessee) engaged in the business of stone trading, had cash deposits amounting to Rs. 24,20,224/- in his bank account and an immovable property purchase of Rs. 11,58,000/-.
Want a deeper insight into the Income Tax Bill, 2025? Click here
The reassessment proceedings were initiated under Section 148, but the assessee failed to file a return due to a lack of awareness of the faceless assessment mode. The assessee furnished a computation of income treating cash deposits as business receipts and paid Rs. 23,789/- in taxes.
Read More: Failure to Receive Valid Notice Leads to Ex-Parte Order: ITAT Remands Matter to CIT(A) [Read Order]
The Assessing Officer (AO) rejected the assessee’s computation and added Rs. 24,20,224/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 and Rs. 11,58,000/- as unexplained investment under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act.
Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order affirming the AO’s decision due to the non-compliance of the statutory notices. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT.
Clear all Your Doubts on RCM, TCS, GTA, OIDAR, SEZ, ISD Etc... Click Here
The Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the due to the lack of awareness about the assessment process, which led to the failure to file submissions before the lower authorities. The counsel further submitted that the assessee should be given an opportunity to submit all requisite details before the CIT(A).
The two-member bench, comprising Shri Laliet Kumar (Judicial Member) and Shri Manjunatha G. (Accountant Member), observed that in the interest of justice, the matter should be remanded for reconsideration and to allow the assessee to submit additional evidence.
The tribunal observed the assessee’s failure to respond to multiple statutory notices. Therefore the tribunal imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,000, payable to the Telangana State Legal Aid Authorities at the Telangana High Court.
Tax Planning For NRIs Click Here
The tribunal directed the assessee to submit proof of payment to the registry within one month. Thereby, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
