What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the orders of the lower authorities were ex-parte. While the assessee showed little enthusiasm in pursuing the matter below, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order in the interest of substantial justice.

The assessee, Manglor Kisan Sewa Sahakari Samiti, appealed an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The Assessing Officer had also passed an ex-parte assessment order. The assessee challenged an addition of Rs. 1,81,785/- representing unexplained cash deposits from members.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders were justified, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh assessment.

Manglor Kisan Sewa Sahakari… vs ITO | ITAT Dehradun 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN CIRCUIT BENCH: DEHRADUN

For Respondent: Shri Deepak Chaudhary, JCIT

Hearing: 21/07/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN CIRCUIT BENCH: DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.271/DDN/2026 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015-16) Manglor Kisan Sewa Sahakari ITO, Samiti, Roorkee. Manglor Block, District Haridwar, Vs. Uttarakhand, Roorkee, Uttarakhand-247656. PAN-AACAM2287J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Shri Deepak Chaudhary, JCIT Date of Hearing 21/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement 21 /07/2026 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, AM:

This appeal arises from the order dated 23.12.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter as ‘the Act’), by Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi. 2. In this case, on the last date of hearing none attended on behalf of the assessee, but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR. 3. The Ld. DR took us through the impugned order and the order of Ld. AO. It was pointed out that both the orders were ex-parte in nature, because of this, the aggrieved assessee has approached the ITAT with five very detailed and

2 ITA No.271 /DDN/2026 Manglor Kisan Sewa Sahakari Samiti vs. ITO

argumentative grounds. It was pointed out by the Ld. DR that the assessee has challenged the addition of Rs.1,81,785,00/-, representing deposits in cash from Members as unexplained. The Ld. DR took us through the orders of authorities below and stated that in the absence of any compliance before them such authorities had no option but to pass best judgment assessment and appellant orders. 4. We have considered the submissions of Ld. DR and have gone through the records before us; it is seen that the orders of authorities below are ex-parte in nature. We find that the assessee has showed little enthusiasm for pursuing the tax matters before the authorities below. However, in the interests of substantial justice, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remit this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. 5. In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 21/07/2027.

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (SANJAY AWASTHI) VICE PRESIDEN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 28/07/2026 *PK, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI (Dehradun Circuit Bench, Dehradun)

MANGLOR KISAN SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED,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