PANKAJ NAMDEV BHAGAT,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 28(2)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.02.2026 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2013–14, arising from the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. There is a delay of 25 days in filing the appeal. The assessee explained that the impugned order sent through e-mail went to the spam folder and came to his notice only upon subsequently accessing the income-tax portal. Considering the short delay and the reasonable explanation furnished, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

The Assessing Officer completed the assessment at a total income of Rs.49,27,759 after making additions of Rs.13,81,000 in respect of the sale of immovable property and Rs.30,21,787 under section 68 of the Act. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal as infructuous on the ground that the assessee had opted for settlement under the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

The learned Authorised Representative submitted that though the assessee had initially opted for the said Scheme, the tax determined thereunder was not paid and the dispute was not settled. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the impugned order.

We have considered the rival submissions. The impugned order itself records that the evidence of payment of tax and Form Nos. 4 and 5 were not available. Since the assessee claims that the tax was not paid and the dispute was not finally settled under the Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, the learned CIT(A) was required to adjudicate the appeal on merits.

We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, in accordance with law, after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. All the grounds raised by the assessee are kept open.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.