PRAKASH MAHADEV GAIKWAD,BELAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 26.06.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. CIT(A)) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2014-15.

Admittedly in the instant case, the Ld. Commissioner in the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order dated 27.12.2016 u/s 143(3) of the Act, whereby 3 additions of Rs. 51,14,040, Rs. 81,94,000/- and 1,44,998/- were respectively made on account of unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act, unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and disallowance on Prakash Mahadev Gaikwad account of interest income without seeking exemption u/s 80TT of the Act, issued various notices to the Assessee, however, the Assessee failed to comply with the same and therefore in the constrained circumstance, the Ld. Commissioner affirmed the aforesaid addition by dismissing the appeal of the assessee.

This court has given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and observed that though the conduct of the assessee seems to be non-compliant, as despite of sending notice for the date of hearing on 09.10.2025, the Assessee neither appeared nor filed any adjournment. However, it is a fact that the absence of relevant submissions and documents, which the Assessee failed to file, the issues involved remain to remained to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner and therefore for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice and considering the conduct of the Assessee as appears from para No. 5 of the impugned order, this court is inclined remand the instant case to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision of a fresh, however, subject to deposit of Rs. 5000/- in the Revenue Department in “other heads” within 15 days of the receipt of this order. Suffice to say, the Ld. Commissioner shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. This court clarifies that in case of the subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled to any leniency.

Thus, the case is accordingly remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh in the above terms.