What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the case was fact-based and required proper fact-finding at the lower levels, which had not been done due to the assessee's non-compliance. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the AO for fresh assessment.

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance. The assessee sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT, citing family disputes and corporate battles as reasons for non-compliance. The ITAT condoned the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment due to the assessee's non-compliance at lower appellate stages and the need for proper fact-finding.

Joharilal Agarwala Sales Private… vs ACIT | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Maitin, CA

For Respondent: Shri Tarun Sharda, Sr. DR

Hearing: 17.08.2026

ITA No. 2755/DEL/2026 JOHARILAL AGARWALA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2755/DEL/2026 Assessment Year: 2012-13 JOHARILAL AGARWALA SALES PRIVATE Vs ACIT, LIMITED, . Central Circle 15, 3A, Keshowjee Chambers, Room No.25, Delhi 110001. Pollock Street, Kolkata, West Bengal 700001. PAN No. AAACJ7422J Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Nishant Maitin, CA Revenue by Shri Tarun Sharda, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 17.08.2026 Pronouncement on 17.08.2026 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

In this case, there is a delay of 137 days in the filing of the present appeal. The assessee has requested for condoning the same through an affidavit with the following terms:

“I, Vikash Kumar Agarwala, Son of Late Dhan Kumar Agarwala, aged 50 years residing at Patna Chemical Compound, Mogalpura, Patna city, District – Patna – 800008, Bihar, do solemnly affirm and say as follows: 1. That I am individual and citizen of India holding PAN – ADFPA647K and have been appointed as Director or Joharilal Agarwala Sales Private Limited (PAN – AAACJ7422J) along with Sri Ajay Kumar Agarwala who is my brother and was also director in the said company since 03.09.2015 and subsequently resigned on 07.04.2026. 2. That due to family dispute and corporate battle in respect of other family companies which are presently under consideration

ITA No. 2755/DEL/2026 JOHARILAL AGARWALA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED before Hon’ble NCLT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata, compliance could not be made during the appellate proceedings. 3. That pursuant to the settlement between the brothers, the control of appellant company was given to the deponent. 4. That upon accessing the website maintained by Income Tax Department, it transpired that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC had dismissed the appeal on 13.08.2025. 5. That the appellant took immediate steps to file the petition before this Hon’ble Tribunal and filed the appeal on 17.03.2026 with a delay of 156 days after excluding the statutory period of 60 days which is available for filing of appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal. 6. That non-appearance in the matter was not on account of any negligence but was caused for reasons beyond control of the appellant. I solemnly affirm that this declaration is true, and it conceals nothing, and information is not false in nature.” 1.1 Considering the reasons given in the said petition, the delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

This appeal arises from order dated 13.08.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by Ld. CIT(A)-26, Delhi.

2.1 It is seen that vide order dated 23.12.2019, the Ld. AO has recorded that information was received from the Investigation Wing, Kolkata on 06.03.2019 where large value transactions in the bank accounts of the assessee were noticed and there was a substantial mismatch between the turnover of business disclosed by the assessee and the deposits in the bank accounts. The Ld. AO has mentioned that the assessee apparently failed to furnish any supporting documents to justify the transactions seen in the bank accounts. The Ld. AO held that Rs.147 2

ITA No. 2755/DEL/2026 JOHARILAL AGARWALA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED crores seen in the account of the assessee was not justified and thereafter he applied a gross profit rate of 4.32% on Rs.147 crores to arrive at a total addition of Rs.635,04,000/-.

2.2 The assessee, thereafter, approached the Ld. CIT(A) but as it recorded on page 3 para 4 of the impugned order, he did not attend to any of the six notices issued from the office of Ld. CIT(A). Thereafter, an ex parte order was passed, dismissing the appeal.

Before us the Ld. AR stated that due to the reasons mentioned in the affidavit seeking condonation of delay, the assessee could not substantially present his case before the Ld. AO and even before the Ld. CIT(A) he could not avail of the opportunities given by him. It was the prayer that the assessee deserved another chance to prove the facts and for this purpose the Ld. AR requested that this matter may be remanded back to the file of Ld. AO.

3.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. We find that this is a facts-based case which requires good fact finding at lower levels to enable an appreciation of the controversy on the basis of evidences and facts. Since this has not been done at the lower levels, mainly because the assessee was non- compliant for reasons mentioned in the affidavit seeking condonation of

ITA No. 2755/DEL/2026 JOHARILAL AGARWALA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED delay, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remit this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. The assessee would file all relevant details for proving the entries amounting to Rs.147 crores and the Ld. AO would conduct any enquiry as deemed fit for ascertaining the facts.

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VIMAL KUMAR) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 08.09.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

JOHARILAL AGARWALA SALES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 15, DELHI, DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments