BIHARI JI PACKAGING,LUCKNOW vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), LUCKNOW

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M.:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 30.06.2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for Assessment Year 2018-19.

2.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 29.10.2018 declaring a total income of Rs.1,470/-. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued statutory notices to the assessee. In response, the assessee electronically filed reply dated 23.12.2020 stating therein that the assessee had introduced capital of Rs.2.87 crores through Bank loan by the two partners, Shri

ITA No.623/LKW/2025 Page 2 of 6

Awdhesh Narain Tripathi and his son, Shri Durgesh Tripathi. The assessee was required to provide the details of loans and advances and other documents. However, there was no response from the side of the assessee. The AO, after considering the return and written submission filed by the assessee, observed that Shri Awadesh Narain Tripathi along with his son, Shri Durgesh Tripathi has introduced capital to the tune of Rs.3,80,58,573/-. The AO further observed that the assessee had produced the capital account of Shri Durgesh Tripathi but did not produce the capital account of shri Awadesh Narain Tripathi and also did not produce any documentary evidence relating to bank loan of Rs.2.87 crores. Since the assessee failed to offer any explanation about the nature and source of the capital introduced, the alleged capital introduced by the assessee to the tune of Rs.3,80,58,573/- was treated as unexplained cash credit and was added to the income of the assessee under section 68 of the Act. The AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act’) read with section 144B of the Act.

2.1 The AO also invoked the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271AAC of the Act, separately.

ITA No.623/LKW/2025 Page 3 of 6

2.2 Aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC, which dismissed the appeal of the assessee for the reason of non-compliance by the assessee and confirmed the order of the AO.

2.3 Now the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the order of the NFAC, by raising the following grounds of appeal:

ITA No.623/LKW/2025 Page 4 of 6

arbitrarily held, that no compliance having been made, was not justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte. 05. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition of Rs.3,80,60,043/- u/s 68 of the Act which addition is contrary to facts bad in law be deleted. 06. Because on a proper consideration of the facts it would be noticed that the addition of Rs.3,80,60,043/- made by the A.O. as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 r.w.s 115BBE is contrary to the provisions of the law and is factually misconceived and unwarranted be deleted. 3.0 During the course of hearing before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted that the NFAC has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by passing an ex-parte order, without adjudicating the issues involved in the appeal of the assessee on merit. The Ld. A.R. accepted that the assessee could not be represented before the NFAC and that there was only partial compliance before the AO. The Ld. A.R. prayed that the appeal of the assessee may be restored to the file of the NFAC for deciding the same on merit after considering the submissions of the assessee.

4.0 Per contra, the Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that there was non-compliance by the assessee before both the lower authorities and, therefore, no further opportunity be given to the assessee and the appeal of the assessee be dismissed.

ITA No.623/LKW/2025 Page 5 of 6

5.0 We have heard both the parties and have also perused the material on record. It is evident that there was complete non- compliance on the part of the assessee during the course of first appellate proceedings. However, looking into the facts of this case, we are of the considered view that the assessee deserves one last opportunity to present its case and, therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, we restore this file to the Office of the NFAC with the direction to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case. We also caution the assessee to fully comply with the directions of the NFAC in the set-aside proceedings when called upon to do so, failing which, the NFAC would be at complete liberty to pass the order in accordance with law, based on material available on record even if it is ex-parte qua the assessee.

6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/04/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [NIKHIL CHOUDHARY] [SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

DATED:30/04/2026 JJ:

ITA No.623/LKW/2025 Page 6 of 6