ORDER

PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Hyderabad, dated 03/02/2025, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short, “AO”) under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), dated04/12/2024 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. The assessee has assailed the impugned order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The Order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is against the law, weight of evidence and probabilities of the case.

2. The assessment order dated 04.12.2024 passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act is barred by limitation and non-est in law, as the same is passed beyond the period of ONE YEAR from the end of the financial year in which the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued.

3. That the learned Assessing Officer erred in law in issuing the notice under section 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961, beyond the prescribed time limit as stipulated under section 149. The Impugned notice has been issued after the expiry of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, whereas no conditions existed to justify an extended limitation of up to ten years under the amended provisions. Consequently, the said notice is time-barred, devoid of jurisdiction, and liable to be quashed.

4. The appellant carves leave to add to, amend OR modify the above grounds of appeal either before OR at the time of hearing of the appeal, if it is considered necessary.

5. That, the Ld. Assessing Officer has grossly erred in making addition on account of cash deposited in bank account by alleging the same as income chargeable to tax under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that both the accounts in consideration are joint accounts.

6. That, the Ld. Assessing Officer has grossly erred in making addition on account of cash deposited in bank account by alleging the same as income chargeable to tax under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the fact that there are Rs. 10,06,400/- from Corporation Bank.”

2. Succinctly stated, the AO based on information flagged in accordance with Risk Management Strategy-Non-filing of Return-NMS category in the insight portal, observed that the assessee, a Non- Resident Indian (NRI) had during the subject year though made cash deposits in his Savings Bank accounts with, viz., (i) ICICI Bank; and (ii) Corporation Bank and also was in receipt of interest income on which tax was deducted at source under section 195 of the Act, but had not filed his return of income for the year under consideration, initiated proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 16/04/2022 was e-served upon the assessee. However, the assessee failed to comply with the aforesaid notice and did not file his return of income in compliance thereto.

3. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee during the subject year had made cash deposits aggregating to Rs.35,12,400/- in his bank accounts, viz., NRO SB account with ICICI Bank: Rs.24,32,400/-; and (ii) NRO SB account with Corporation Bank: Rs.10,80,000/-. The AO in absence of explanation forthcoming regarding the source of the cash deposits of Rs.35.12 lakhs (approx.) held the same as having been sourced out of the unexplained money of the assessee under section 69A of the Act. Also, the AO made an addition of the interest income received from the aforementioned bank accounts amounting to Rs.4,433/- under the head “other sources”. Accordingly, the AO vide his order under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act, dated 04/12/2024 determined the income of the assessee at Rs.35,16,833/-.

4. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A), who taking support of the amendment made available to section 251 of the Act vid