EVERNEST ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(2)(1), BENGALURU

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

ITA No.632/Bang/2026 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Evernest Estates Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of B-02, 2nd Floor, Income Tax, Jain Heights SOLUS-01, Circle – 2(2)(1), 1st Cross JC Road, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 027. PAN – AAGCE 3664 H APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Sahana THM, AR Revenue by : Shri Somnath S Ukkali, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 30.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 13.07.2026 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal, filed by the assessee, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter, ld. CIT(A)), under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, the Act), dated 12.02.2026.

ITA No.632/Bang/2026 Page 2 of 6 3. The relevant facts are that the assessee is a private limited company that owns and leases commercial real estate. The assessee for the AY 2022-23 filed its return of income reporting a business loss of ₹6,09,67,667/-. The return was selected for scrutiny under CASS to verify the large investment in real estate, the introduction of valuable tangible assets, the depreciation claim, the sources of investments, and the significant liabilities shown in the balance sheet.

3.1 During the assessment, several notices and show-cause notices were issued, requiring the assessee to furnish necessary details and explanations, and the assessee replied to those notices. Finally, the AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act and assessed the total income at Rs. 9,62,52,928/- after making various additions.

4.1 However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal without going into the merits of the addition, holding that neither the assessee nor its representative filed any reply, written submission, or details in response to the notices issued during the appellate proceedings. The relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is extracted as under: In the appeal proceedings the appellant has miserably failed to file any compliance; neither the appellant nor her authorised representative has made either any written submission or filed any adjournment letter/ petition. Therefore the appellant miserably failed to substantiate the grounds taken by him with the supporting

.

ITA No.632/Bang/2026 Page 3 of 6 documents .This indicates the appellant is not willing to pursue his appeal .In view of above , I do not find any infirmity in the order of the AO and resultantly, I have no hesitation in holding that the impugned order of the AO dated 26-03-2024 isbased on apropos consideration of facts and law and hence the same does not warrant interference in as much as the appellant being unable to discharge its onus of proving the deficiencies found by the AO under the above mentioned head substantiating with supporting documents .Therefore I am of opinion that AO’s decision of determining total income after making above mentioned additions addition Rs. 5,50,91,008 /-, Rs. 2,60,62,896 ,Rs. 1,51,95,322 /- , Rs. 2,02,70,474/- ,Rs. 4,05,99,895 /- are justified and in accordance with law. Accordingly impugned additions stand confirmed. The grounds in this regard are dismissed

.

ITA No.632/Bang/2026 Page 4 of 6 in dismissing the assessee's appeal without adjudicating the grounds raised on merits.

8.1 From the records, it is evident that the assessee had preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) challenging various additions made by the AO in the assessment framed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act. It is also an undisputed fact that the assessee had filed a detailed statement of facts along with the memorandum of appeal, which has been reproduced by the learned CIT(A) in the impugned order. However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that no compliance was made during the appellate proceedings and, therefore, proceeded to confirm all the additions made by the AO without examining the issues on merits.

8.2 Before us, the learned AR submitted that a detailed written submission dated 06.11.2025 running into 63 pages, together with a paper book, had been duly prepared for filing before the learned CIT(A). However, owing to an inadvertent omission, the same could not be uploaded on the e-filing portal. A copy of the said written submission has been placed before us. The learned DR, fairly, did not object to restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

8.3 Having considered the rival submissions, we are of the view that the impugned appellate order cannot be sustained. The first appellate authority is vested with quasi-judicial powers and is under a statutory obligation to dispose of the appeal by passing a reasoned and speaking order after examining the grounds raised by the assessee and the

.

ITA No.632/Bang/2026 Page 5 of 6 materials available on record. Merely because the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued during the appellate proceedings, the learned CIT(A) was not relieved of the duty to adjudicate the issues arising from the assessment order on their own merits. Confirmation of the additions without dealing with the specific grounds of appeal and without examining the facts and evidences available on record defeats the very object of the appellate proceedings.

8.4 At the same time, we also find that the assessee was not diligent in prosecuting the appeal before the learned CIT(A). The explanation furnished before us is that the written submissions and supporting documents were prepared but could not be uploaded on the e-portal due to an inadvertent omission. Considering the nature of the explanation, the fact that the written submissions were admittedly available, and the fair stand taken by the learned DR, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity deserves to be granted to the assessee in the interest of substantial justice. The principles of natural justice require that a litigant should ordinarily be afforded an effective opportunity to present its case, particularly when the appeal involves substantial additions, and the matter has not been examined by the first appellate authority on the merits.

8.5 Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) and restore the entire matter to his file for fresh adjudication on the merits in accordance with law. The learned CIT(A) shall consider the written submissions, paper book and such other evidence as may be filed by the assessee, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard, and thereafter pass a speaking order dealing with each ground of appeal in accordance with law.

.

ITA No.632/Bang/2026 Page 6 of 6 8.6 We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the additions made by the AO, and all the issues are left open for adjudication by the learned CIT(A). The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the appellate proceedings and ensure timely compliance with all notices and directions issued by the learned CIT(A). Failure to do so may entail consequences permissible under law. Accordingly, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in court on 13th day of July, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 13th 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

.