BHUPENDRA BHANDARI (THROUGH LEGAL HEIR BHUSHAN BHANDARI KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA

Per Annapurna Gupta, AM:-

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 25.08.2025 under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The impugned assessment order made u/s 143(3) dated 11.04.2021 is bad in law and on facts of the case, being without jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same kindly be deleted. 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in framing the order without affording adequate and reasonable opportunity and even without complying with the mandatory statutory requirement of law. The impugned order having been framed in gross breach of natural justice, kindly be quashed. 3. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the imposing of special tax on additional income declared in ROI of Rs. 6,42,504/ on account of cash and Rs.1,26,78,700/- on account of investment in business stock (totalling to Rs. 1,33,21,204), as per provision of S. 115BBE of the Act. The invoking of S.115BBE is contrary to the provisions of law, on facts and is without jurisdiction. The tax liability so levied, kindly be deleted in full. 4. The Id. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the denial to deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80C and 80D of the Act. The addition so confirmed by the Id. CIT(A) being totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts of the case, kindly be deleted in full. 5. The Id. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B & 234C of the Act. The appellant totally denies itliability of charging of any such interest. The interest, so charged, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in full. 6. The appellant prays your honour to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing.

P a g e | 3 ITA No.1364/JPR/2025 Bhupendra Bhandari (through legal heir Bhushan Bhandari). 3. The Orders of the Authorities below reveal that assessment was made on the assessee u/s 143(3) of the Act and the income surrendered by the assessee, on account of excess cash and unaccounted investment in stock found during survey conducted on the assessee u/s 133A of the Act amounting to Rs.6,42,504/- and Rs.1,26,78,700/- ,was treated as unaccounted income of the assessee u/s 69A and Section 69B of the Act respectively, and tax rate as per Section 115BBE of the Act applied on the same. Assessment Order reveals that the assessee had admitted to the said excess cash and unaccounted income in stock as his unaccounted income and included the same in his profit and loss account also but had paid the tax on the same at the normal rate. The AO however, treated it as his undisclosed income as per Section 69A and 69B of the Act respectively and levied tax at the special rates specified u/s 115BBE of the Act, at the rate of 60% + surcharge at the rate of 25% and cess at the rate of 3% . 4. The matter was carried in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), where none appeared on behalf of the assessee and the Ld. CIT(A) accordingly held that in absence of any response from the assessee, it was not possible to execute the appeal of the assessee and dismissed the same. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated before us that the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) could not be attended because the assessee had expired on 06.03.2025, during the pendency of appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who had passed his order on 25.08.2025. Copy of the death certificate of the assessee was furnished before us as evidence.

P a g e | 4 ITA No.1364/JPR/2025 Bhupendra Bhandari (through legal heir Bhushan Bhandari). 6. Further, we have noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised by the assessee in its appeal on merits. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) therefore is not in accordance with Section 250(6) of the Act which states that “the order of the Commissioner(Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. 7. The appeal of the assessee is therefore restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be adjudicated afresh on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 8. In effect, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 17.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (Kuldip Singh) (Annapurna Gupta) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 17.08.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT By Order, Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur