LAXMI ENGINEERING,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(1)(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. 315/RJT/2026 [ �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Laxmi Engineering Income Tax Officer 3(1)(1) Nr. Shreeji Gaushala, Gondal Road, IT-Office, New Aayakar Bhawan, Vs. B/h Tulip, Party Plot, Vavdi, Rajkot- Rajkot-360001, Gujarat 360004, Gujarat �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAAFL7147B (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Harsh Mehta, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 15/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 15/07/2026

:: ORDER :: Per, Shri Sonjoy Sarma, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20, 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 04.12.2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by assessing officer u/s. 147 of the Act, dated 11.11.2024. 02. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm and filed its return of income for the assessment year under consideration declaring a total income of Rs.75,210. Subsequently, the case was selected under the High Risk CRIU on the basis of information received from the Investigation Wing that the assessee

ITA No. 315/RJT/2026 Laxmi Engineering had undertaken transactions with an entity allegedly engaged in providing bogus invoices. The information had been gathered pursuant to investigations carried out by the Investigation Wing of the Department. Based on the said information, proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were initiated, and a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. The assessee did not file a return of income in response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. During the course of reassessment proceedings, various statutory notices were issued. After considering the material available on record and the replies furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Act, determining the total income at Rs.44,79,597. 03. Aggrieved by the reassessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by holding that there was a delay of 108 days in filing the appeal and the assessee had failed to satisfactorily explain the delay. The appeal was also decided ex parte. 04. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. At the time of hearing the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee could not effectively represent its case before the learned CIT(A) due to bona fide reasons, resulting in the delay in filing the appeal and consequent ex parte disposal. It was, therefore, prayed that, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to present its case on merits. 05. On the other hand, the Ld. DR did not seriously oppose the restoration of the matter. However, he submitted that the conduct of the assessee clearly demonstrates that it has been a habitual defaulter, having failed to properly participate both before the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A).

Page 2 of 3

ITA No. 315/RJT/2026 Laxmi Engineering 06. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the assessee did not effectively participate in the proceedings before the Assessing Officer and also failed to properly explain the delay in filing the appeal before the learned CIT(A). Nevertheless, considering the principles of natural justice and in order to afford the assessee one final opportunity to substantiate its case on merits, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A).However, considering the conduct of the assessee in not diligently prosecuting the matter before the lower authorities, we direct the assessee to deposit costs of Rs.1,000 with the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund and produce the receipt of such payment before the learned CIT(A) at the time of hearing.

The learned CIT(A) shall thereafter adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate in the appellate proceedings and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 15th 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: 15/07/2026 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