Addition in the hands of Assessee in respect of account belonging to other: ITAT Agra deleted the addition after condoning delay of 174 days
The judgment from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Agra Bench in the case of Anurag Kumar Maheshwari vs. Income-Tax Officer (ITA No. 139/Agr/2023, dated November 29, 2024) deals with two key issues:
1. Condonation of Delay
• Delay: The appeal was filed 174 days late, beyond the time prescribed under Section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
• Reason for Delay:
• The assessee, with nominal income, relied on counsel (Shri Sachin Maheshwari, Advocate) for filing returns.
• The email ID registered with the Income Tax Portal belonged to the counsel’s staff.
• The communication regarding the CIT(A)’s order was missed due to staff oversight and was not conveyed to the assessee.
• The assessee became aware of the order only after receiving a notice dated 18.09.2023 from the Assessing Officer regarding outstanding demand.
• An affidavit and supporting letter from the counsel explained the circumstances leading to the delay.
• Decision:
The tribunal, considering the affidavit and explanation, condoned the delay. The Department Representative (DR) did not object to the condonation.
2. Addition of Rs. 4,97,810/-
• Context:
The amount was added to the assessee’s income based on cash deposits in a bank account titled “Anurag Kumar Neeraj Kumar”, which was actually owned by Shri Neeraj Kumar.
Arguments by Assessee:
• The bank account was not owned by the assessee but by Shri Neeraj Kumar.
• The department failed to make inquiries under Section 131 (summons) or Section 133(6) (information gathering) with Shri Neeraj Kumar or issue notice under Section 143(2) or Section 148.
• The CIT(A)’s powers are co-extensive with those of the AO, and the revenue did not challenge the appellate order.
Tribunal’s Observations:
• There was no evidence that the deposits belonged to the assessee.
• The department did not investigate the claim of Shri Neeraj Kumar owning the account.
• The revenue had not filed a cross-objection, indicating no grievance against the CIT(A)’s findings.
*The tribunal directed the Assessing Officer (AO) to delete the addition of Rs. 4,97,810/- from the hands of the assessee
The copy of the order is as under:
