ATIKAHMMAD MOMIN,INDI, VIJAYAPUR vs. ITO WARD-1 & TPS. KAR-W-(521)(92), VIJAYAPUR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 965/Bang/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Atikahmmad Momin, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Baharpet Galli, Ward – 1 & TPS, Indl. District Vijayapur, KAR-W - (521)(92), Vijayapur – 586 209. Bengaluru. PAN – ALNPM 3516 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, Smt. Sweta & Shri Shahabaz M Galgali, Advocates Revenue by : Shri Senthil Kumar PM, JCIT (DR) Date of hearing : 09.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 20.07.2026 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, dated 04.02.2026 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 whereby the appeal of the assessee came to be dismissed in limine on the ground of delay in filing the appeal without adjudicating the issues on merits.

ITA No.965/Bang/2026 Page 2 of 5 under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, treating the entire credits appearing in the bank account as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and making an addition of ₹1,30,00,000/- only.

4.1 The learned Authorized Representative submitted that a comprehensive paper book has been filed containing, inter alia, copies of the assessment order, appeal papers, bank statements, contract receipts, supporting documents, and other relevant evidences. It was further submitted that subsequent to the proceedings before the learned CIT(A), the assessee has lodged a First Information Report (FIR) against the erstwhile tax consultant alleging failure to discharge professional obligations, including non-filing of the return of income and failure to represent the assessee before the Assessing Officer as well as before the learned CIT(A), despite being entrusted with the conduct of the tax proceedings.

.

ITA No.965/Bang/2026 Page 3 of 5 4.2 The learned Authorized Representative further submitted that the assessee should not be made to suffer for the negligence and misconduct of the tax consultant. It was further undertaken that, if one more opportunity is granted, the assessee shall fully cooperate with the Department and comply with all notices and directions issued during the appellate proceedings.

6.1 The explanation offered by the assessee indicates that the delay occurred because the tax matters were entrusted to the erstwhile tax consultant who failed to file the return of income, failed to respond to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer, failed to prosecute the appeal before the learned CIT(A), and failed to keep the assessee informed about the proceedings. The assessee has also placed on record that an FIR has since been lodged against the said consultant alleging such professional misconduct.

6.2 While every litigant is expected to remain vigilant in pursuing legal remedies, it is equally well settled that procedural provisions are intended to advance substantial justice. Where a plausible explanation is offered

.

ITA No.965/Bang/2026 Page 4 of 5 and there is no material to indicate any deliberate or mala fide attempt to delay the proceedings, a liberal approach is warranted so that disputes are decided on merits rather than on technicalities.

6.3 In the facts of the present case, we are satisfied that the assessee has shown sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed period. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) deserves to be condoned.

6.4 We also note that the assessment order proceeds on the footing that the aggregate credits appearing in the bank account constitute unexplained income. Prima facie, where the bank account reflects business transactions, receipts and corresponding withdrawals, the addition of the entire gross credits without examining the nature of the transactions, corresponding debits, business receipts, turnover, or availability of supporting evidence may not be in accordance with law. Such issues necessarily require proper appreciation of facts and evidences and deserve examination after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee. Since the learned CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal on merits, we refrain from expressing any final opinion on the sustainability of the addition. In the interest of substantial justice, we set aside the impugned order of the learned CIT(A). The delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A) is condoned. The matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of all the grounds of appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

.

ITA No.965/Bang/2026 Page 5 of 5 6.5 The assessee, through the learned Authorized Representative, has undertaken before us that all notices to be issued by the appellate authority shall be duly complied with and that no unnecessary adjournment shall be sought. The said undertaking is taken on record. The assessee shall extend full cooperation for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

6.6 The learned CIT(A) shall consider all evidences filed by the assessee or to be filed by the assessee in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and speaking order after examining the nature of the bank transactions, business receipts, corresponding withdrawals, and other relevant materials, without being influenced by any observations contained in this order. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 20th day of July, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, July, 2026 / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore

.