SHRI KRUSHI UDYOG SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LIMITED,JAM KALYANPUR vs. ITO DWARKA, DWARKA

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. 536/RJT/2026 [ �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2019-20 ] Shri Krushi Udyog Seva Sahakari ITO, Ward 1, Mandli Limited Income Tax Office, Vs. Jam Gadhka, Jam Kalyanpur, Dwarka-361320, Gujarat Devbhoomi Dwarka-361320, Gujarat �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAKAS7461C (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sikandar Halali, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Rajneesh Yadav, Ld. CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 09/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 13/07/2026

:: 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 [in short ‘NFAC’], dated 19.05.2025, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act, dated 13.03.2023. 02. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a non-filer of the return of income. Information was received by the Income-tax Department that during the relevant previous year the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.3,18,87,816 in the bank account maintained with Jamnagar District Co-operative Bank Ltd.

ITA No. 536/RJT/2026 Sh. Krushi Udyog Seva Sahkari Mandali Accordingly, after obtaining the requisite approval, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.In response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act, the assessee failed to file the return of income. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued on various dates requiring the assessee to furnish the requisite details. However, the assessee did not comply with any of the notices. Consequently, a notice under section 144 of the Act was issued. As there was no compliance even thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex parte under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act by treating the cash deposits of Rs.3,18,87,816 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and taxed the same in accordance with the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 03. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). However, despite grant of opportunities on three consecutive dates, the assessee failed to appear or furnish any submissions. The learned CIT(A), therefore, had no option but to dismiss the appeal ex parte and sustain the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 04. Being further aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that both the assessment order as well as the appellate order had been passed ex parte. It was, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee by restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. It was further submitted that there was a delay of 288 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal, for which an application seeking condonation of delay had been filed. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We are satisfied that the assessee has shown sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, the delay of 288 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for

Page 2 of 4

ITA No. 536/RJT/2026 Sh. Krushi Udyog Seva Sahkari Mandali adjudication. From the records, it is evident that the assessee remained in default not only before the Assessing Officer but also before the learned CIT(A). Even before this Tribunal, the appeal has been filed after an inordinate delay of 288 days. Such repeated defaults by the assessee have resulted in avoidable consumption of valuable judicial time at every stage of the proceedings. 05. Nevertheless, in the interest of substantial justice and in adherence to the principles of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to grant one final opportunity to the assessee. However, such opportunity deserves to be granted subject to payment of costs. Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned orders, we restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. This restoration is, however, subject to the condition that the assessee shall deposit costs of Rs.5,000 in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund and produce the receipt of such deposit before the Assessing Officer at the time of the fresh assessment proceedings. In the event of failure to comply with this condition or failure to cooperate with the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation and furnish all relevant documents and evidences without seeking unnecessary adjournments. 06. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the above conditions. Order is pronounced in the open Court on 13/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] [ Shri Sonjoy Sarma ] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �याियक सद�य/Judicial Member राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 13/07/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent

Page 3 of 4

ITA No. 536/RJT/2026 Sh. Krushi Udyog Seva Sahkari Mandali 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Rajkot

Page 4 of 4