9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned Departmental Representative, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of NFAC in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by confirming the addition of Rs. 26,18,786 made by the Assessing Officer. 3.1. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and had not filed his Return of Income. The Assessing Officer had information that the assessee has made cash deposits of Rs. 11,57,100 in ICICI Bank, Aditi Crystal Branch, Nellore having A/c. No. 631005500274 during demonetization period in the financial year 2016-17. He observed that the assessee has done cash/cred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal deposits including cash and credit entries in the mentioned bank account ICICI Bank amounting to Rs. 26,18,786/-, but despite being given specific opportunities to explain the source of the above deposit/credit, appellant failed to explain the source. Therefore, AO invoked the provisions of section 69A of the Act in respect of the above amount and treated the same accordingly. 5.2 During appellate proceedings, various notices u/s. 250 of the Act were issued through ITBA Portal to the appellant vide dated 29.12.2020, 14.10.2021 and 08.12.2021. It has been noted from the appeal record that the appellant was given opportunity to present its appeal by way of written submission and supporting documents/evidences. However, the assessee fail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st known to him has remained non-compliant. No material facts have been brought on record to rebut the finding of the A.O. There remains no doubt that statute has cast upon the appellant a duty to explain the source of deposits/credits in the bank account mentioned above during the period relevant to assessment year under consideration but appellant failed to discharge the above onus. Considering the above factual matrix of the case I am of the considered view that provisions of section 69A are clearly found to be applicable in the case as appellant despite being given ample opportunities during assessment and appellate proceedings, failed to offer any explanation about the nature and source of the deposits and credit entries amounting to R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case. 6. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, heavily relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and NFAC and submitted that despite number of opportunities granted, the assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer or NFAC for which they passed ex parte order. He accordingly submitted that the order of NFAC be upheld. 7. I have heard the rival arguments made by both sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. I have also considered the various decisions cited before me. It is an admitted fact that due to non-appearance of the assessee before the Assessing Officer, he ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
