IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

HON’BLE SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 62/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Arora Vs. Sitaram Meena House No. 4E Asalfa near The Income Tax Officer ghatkopar (W) 27 (3) (2) BKC Maharastra - 400084 Mumbai Sitaram Meena The Income Tax Officer

27 (3) (2) BKC Mumbai Kautyaly Bhavan PAN GIR No. AMGPA0936K /

Applicant Respondent ( ) ( )

Assessee by Ms. Neha Paranjpe Revenue by Shri Swapnil Choudhari (SR. AR)

Date of Hearing 26.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 02.04.2026 आदेश ORDER /

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 24.10.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2012-13. The following grounds are reproduced below:

“1. The learned assessing officer unjustified in issuing notice under section 148 dated 29-09-2019 for reopening the assessment unjustified in reopening of assessment.

2. The assessee is carrying on retail business in cash basis, profit is calculated u/s 44AD of the Income Tax Act

1961

3. The learned assessing officer has earned in law in making Addition of Rs 1,02,00,000/- in Purchase residential flat, whereas money has been earned from business and past saving treating the Income under section 69A unexplained money cash deposited in bank account.

4. The income tax officer has erred in initiating penalty proceeding under section 271(1)(c) of income tax Act.

5. The income tax officer has erred in charging interest under section 234A 234B 234C of the income tax act.

6. The appellant craves leave add ament any of the ground at time or before the hearing.

”

2. At the very outset, we noticed that there is a delay in filing the appeal before us, for which an application has been placed on record. The same is reproduced herein below :

From.

Sanjiv Kumar Arora

1901, Montreal tower, Shastri Nagar. Andheri west Mumbai-68 To. The Assistant Registrar, Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Benches- 'B' Mumbai-400 020 Respected Sir, Ref: In the case of Sanjiv Kumar Arora PAN: AMGPA0936K Assessment Year 2012-13 Sub: Petition to condone the delay of 10 days in filing the appeal before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal The present petition is being filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The order dated 24.10.2024 passed by the CIT(A) under section 250 of the Act was received by the Applicant on 28.10.2024. Thus, the last date of filing the appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT was 27.12.2024. However, the appeal was filed on 06.01.2025 before the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal which is barred by limitation by 10 days. The Applicant submits that the said delay in filing the appeal is due to the reasonable cause and due to the reasons beyond the control of the Applicant. Hence, the Applicant requests before the Hon'ble Tribunal to kindly condone the delay after considering following submission.

1. The Applicant is an Individual Assessee and was subjected to the reassessment proceedings for the Assessment Year: 2012-13. Being a layman, the Applicant is not conversant with the compliances and the appeal procedure under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Thus, he completely relies on the tax consultant for all the compliances as well as for the assessment and appellate proceedings.

2. The assessment order dated 24.12.2019 was passed in the case of Applicant under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act by making an addition of Rs.24,28,000/- under section 69A of the Act by treating the cash deposits as unexplained money. Further, the AO also made the addition of Rs.1,02,00,000/-under section 69A of the Act by doubting the investment made by the Applicant. Being aggrieved with the assessment order, an appeal was preferred to the Ld.CIT(A) challenging the said additions made by the AO.

3. The appeal was disposed off by passing