Tribunal grants appeal delay, emphasizes fair hearing and evidence consideration.

The Tribunal granted condonation of delay for the Assessee's appeal, citing non-receipt of the order due to an address change. The Tribunal admitted the appeal, noting the absence of malafide intent. The case was set aside for fresh adjudication after the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without considering the Assessee's evidence of theft and illness causing the delay. The Tribunal directed reconsideration of the cash deposit addition, emphasizing a fair hearing and consideration of new evidence. The matter was remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision, ensuring procedural fairness.

---

---

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. Dismissal of the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) in limine.
3. Addition of cash deposits in the bank account under the peak theory.
4. Setting aside the case back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The Assessee filed an appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-1, Chandigarh, which was found to be 53 days beyond the limitation period. The Assessee sought condonation of delay, citing reasons related to non-receipt of the appellate order due to a change in address. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions, condoned the delay, noting that the Assessee filed the appeal promptly upon receiving the order through a tenant at the old address. The Tribunal emphasized the absence of malafide intent and admitted the appeal.

Dismissal of the Appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) in Limine:
The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay of 21 days in filing, without finding merit in the Assessee's explanations of theft in the shop and illness causing the delay. The Assessee contended that documentary evidence supporting the delay was not requested by the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted additional evidence of a news report and FIR related to the theft. The Tribunal observed that the Assessee's evidence was not considered by the Ld. CIT(A) and set aside the case for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the principle of natural justice.

Addition of Cash Deposits in the Bank Account under the Peak Theory:
The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment based on cash deposits in the Assessee's bank account and made an addition of Rs. 19,93,000 under the peak theory. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld this addition, leading to the Assessee's appeal. The Assessee argued against the addition, seeking to present additional evidence to support the source of the deposits. The Tribunal did not delve into the merits of the addition but directed the case to be reconsidered by the Ld. CIT(A) after providing a fair opportunity for the Assessee to be heard and considering the newly submitted evidence.

Setting Aside the Case Back to the File of the Ld. CIT(A) for Fresh Adjudication:
In light of the Assessee's explanation for the delay and the additional evidence provided, the Tribunal set aside the case back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of affording the Assessee a fair opportunity to present their case and directed the Ld. CIT(A) to reconsider the matter in accordance with the law, taking into account the newly furnished evidence.

This detailed analysis covers the issues of condonation of delay, dismissal of the appeal, addition of cash deposits, and the direction to reconsider the case, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal judgment.

---