JAI BHAGWAN,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO, ROHTAK

The ld. DR while relying upon the order of the lower authorities, took us through the factual matrix of the case. The ld. Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs.77,20,000/- u/s 69A of the Act treating entire cash deposits as unexplained rejecting appellant’s contentions that the same were out of sale proceeds of agricultural land and ancestral funds. We have noted the both the lower authorities being the ld. AO as well as the Ld. First Appellate Authority have passed an ex-parte order. The order of the ld. CIT(A) has also been noted to be passed in a summary and cryptic manner. We have noted that the order dated 30.01.2024 was also passed by the ld. Assessing Officer ex-parte on account of non-compliance by the appellant assessee. We have noted that the rights of natural justice of the assessee have been violated in as much as the impugned order u/s 250 dated 11.03.2026 has been passed without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. We are conscious of the fact that no appellant benefits by non- prosecution of its case. Be that as it may be, we are of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the matter is remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct him to re-adjudicate the matter afresh after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and in accordance with law. The ld. CIT(A) may if deemed necessary call for remand report from the ld. Assessing Officer. It shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with the statutory notices by the ld. CIT(A). Any non-compliance on the part of the assessee can be adversely viewed. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12th August, 2026.