KIRIT NARENDRAKUMAR BADIYANI,RAJKOT vs. ITO WARD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट। In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member And Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member

आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 373/RJT/2026 [ �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2020-21 ] Kirit Narendrakumar Badiyani ITO Ward 1(2)(1) Prop. Of Shree Gopal Canvasing Agent Income Tax office, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. 216 G.B. Complex Moti Tanki Chowk Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot Subhash Road, 360001, Gujarat Rajkot-360001, Gujarat �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABCPB1751G (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Ankit Anadkat, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 15/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 16/07/2026

:: ORDER :: Per, Shri Sonjoy Sarma, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘NFAC’], dated 22.01.2026, which in turn arises out of an order passed by assessing officer u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 27.03.2025. 02. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year under consideration under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act,

ITA No. 373/RJT/2026 Kirit Narendrakumar Badiyani 1961.Subsequently, information was received through the CRU based on a search and seizure operation carried out in the case of the RK Group, wherein it was found that the developer/builders of the RK Group had received money in cash from various purchasers. During the course of the search, it was allegedly found that the assessee had paid Rs,22,36,000 in cash as on-money towards the purchase of a property in the RK Industrial Zone-9 project. On the basis of the said information, the assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Act by issuing a notice under section 148. In response to the notice, the assessee filed the return of income declaring the same income as originally returned. During the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer treated the alleged cash payment of Rs,22,36,000 as unexplained investment and made an addition under section 69A of the Act. The assessment was accordingly completed. 03. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). However, due to repeated non- compliance on consecutive dates of hearing, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 04. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR fairly submitted that the learned CIT(A) had passed the impugned order ex parte without adjudicating the issues on merits. He, therefore, prayed that, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to present its case before the learned CIT(A). 05. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that the conduct of the assessee clearly shows that it had consistently failed to comply with the notices issued by the appellate authority. However, he left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. 06. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted position that the impugned order has been passed ex parte

Page 2 of 3

ITA No. 373/RJT/2026 Kirit Narendrakumar Badiyani on account of non-compliance by the assessee. Since no decision on merits has been rendered by the learned CIT(A), and considering the principles of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The learned CIT(A) shall decide the appeal afresh on merits after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to strictly comply with all notices issued by the learned CIT(A) and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. Failure to do so shall entitle the learned CIT(A) to decide the appeal in accordance with law on the basis of the material available on record.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 16th day of July, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] [ Shri Sonjoy Sarma ] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �याियक सद�य/Judicial Member राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 16/07/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Rajkot

Page 3 of 3