What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the orders passed by the lower authorities were largely ex parte. Therefore, the matter was set aside and remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, with an assurance of adequate opportunity and compliance.

The assessee faced additions on account of unexplained credits in his bank account and an undisclosed contract receipt. The assessment and the subsequent appeal before the CIT(A) were largely ex parte due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard by the lower authorities and whether the additions made were justified on merits.

Sudhir Agrawal, Roorkee vs ITO | ITAT Dehradun 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB” DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, Adv

For Respondent: Shri Deepak Chaudhary, JCIT

Hearing: 22.07.2026

ITA No.309/DDN/2026 SUDHIR AGARWAL

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH “DB” DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.309/DDN/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-19 SUDHIR AGARWAL, Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 213, Purvi Amber Talab, Roorkee, Income Tax Office, Roorkee, Uttarakhand 247667. Uttarakhand 247667. PAN No. AEFPA2407N Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Anil Jain, Adv. Revenue by Shri Deepak Chaudhary, JCIT Date of hearing: 22.07.2026 Pronouncement on 22.07.2026 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal arises from order dated 02.04.2026, passed by NFAC u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”).

1.1 In this case, the Ld. AO has given details of notices issued by him and the status of compliance thereon at page 2 of his order. It is seen that there was no adequate compliance at that level and the assessment order has been passed in a virtually ex parte manner. It is seen that there has been an addition of Rs.1,00,45,206/- on account of credits allegedly unexplained, as appearing in the bank account of the assessee. There is a further addition of Rs.31,406/- on account of a contract receipt which was allegedly not disclosed by the assessee. 1

ITA No.309/DDN/2026 SUDHIR AGARWAL 1.2 The aggrieved assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) where also he could not succeed mainly on the ground that several notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT(A) were not responded to by the assessee (discussion at para 6 at page 3 of the impugned order).

1.3 The aggrieved assessee has now approached the ITAT with grounds challenging the denial of opportunity and also the addition on merits.

Before us the Ld. AR requested for one more opportunity to present the facts before the Ld. AO as the assessee had not been able to respond to the opportunities provided at that level since the notices were not received by him. It was the submission that the address and email id available with the Department was not used by the assessee at that point of time. The Ld. AR made a statement at the Bar that the assessee would comply with any notice issued by the Ld. AO in case the matter was to be remanded back.

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

We have considered the argument of Ld. AR/DR and have gone through the records before us. We find that the issues involved are factual in nature and since the authorities below have passed more or less ex parte orders, we are constrained to set aside the impugned order and remit this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment.

ITA No.309/DDN/2026 SUDHIR AGARWAL While the Ld. AO would provide adequate opportunity of hearing, the assessee would stick to his promise to comply fully before the Ld. AO.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 22.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 11.08.2026 *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

SUDHIR AGRAWAL,ROORKEE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, , ROORKEE

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