Cash Deposit Addition of ₹9 Lakh: ITAT Remands With One More Opportunity For Production of Documentary Evidence [Read Order]
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A) order and remanded the matter to provide the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate the source of cash deposits, as the assessee’s non-compliance was due to illness, and the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution
![Cash Deposit Addition of ₹9 Lakh: ITAT Remands With One More Opportunity For Production of Documentary Evidence [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/07/19/2065641-cash-deposit-cash-deposit-addition-cash-deposit-addition-of-9-lakh-itat-itat-remands-taxscan.webp "Cash Deposit Addition of ₹9 Lakh: ITAT Remands With One More Opportunity For Production of Documentary Evidence [Read Order]")
The Cuttack Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) restored the appeal of Tapas Kumar Chanda to the Commissionerof Income Tax (Appeals)[ CIT(A) ] with a direction to grant one more opportunity to substantiate the source of cash deposits of Rs. 4,18,000, after the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for lack of representation. Tapas Kumar Chanda (assessee) faced...
The Cuttack Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) restored the appeal of Tapas Kumar Chanda to the Commissionerof Income Tax (Appeals)[ CIT(A) ] with a direction to grant one more opportunity to substantiate the source of cash deposits of Rs. 4,18,000, after the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for lack of representation.
Tapas Kumar Chanda (assessee) faced assessment proceedings for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, where the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee failed to furnish documentary evidence for cash in hand amounting to Rs. 4,18,000.
The AO completed the assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and determined the total income at Rs. 9,53,550.
Aggrieved by the AO’s order, the assessee appealed to the CIT(A). Despite multiple opportunities, there was no representation from the assessee, leading the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution.
Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here
Aggrieved by the CIT(A)’s order, the assessee appealed to the ITAT. The assessee’s counsel argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without considering the case on merits and requested one more opportunity, assuring cooperation in the proceedings.
The counsel also undertook that the assessee will cooperate with the proceedings if the matter was restored back to the file of the AO.
The single-member bench Comprising Duvvuru RL Reddy observed that the AO’s assessment under Section 144 was due to the assessee’s failure to produce documentary evidence. It further noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-compliance, without adjudication on merits.
The Tribunal remanded the matter to the CIT(A) with a direction to provide the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate the cash deposits with documentary evidence. It also directed the assessee to cooperate with proceedings of the CIT(A).
The Bench also cautioned the assessee if failed to cooperate in the proceedings then the CIT(A) could pass an appropriate order based on available materials. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
