GORKHA PATHSHALA SECONDARY SCHOOL,SHILLONG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WARD, SHILLONG

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – GUWAHATI BENCH VIRTUAL BENCH AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member ITA Nos. 63/GTY/2026 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Gorkha Pathshala Secondary School………………………….………...Appellant Mawprem, Shillong, Meghalaya-793002 [PAN: AAAAG3945P] vs. ITO, ITO Ward, Shillong ……………………..……...…..…..Respondent Meghalaya-793001 Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 23, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : April 30, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.11.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, in the case of assessee, it was identified through the risk management strategy portal on account of certain financial transaction pertaining to the relevant previous year. It was observed that the assessee had not filed return of income for the assessment year 2015-16. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened by issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) were also issued. In response, the assessee filed return of income and furnish certain submissions. However, the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the explanation furnished by the assessee,

ITA No.63/GTY/2026 Gorkha Pathshala Secondary School particularly in respect of cash deposit reflected in bank account, amounting to Rs.95,23,771/-. Due to non-furnishing of supported documents, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, and treated the said amount unexplained, thereby, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.95,23,771/-. 3. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee failed to furnish the adequate supporting documents or explanation to substantiate the claim. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. 4. Still aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, we notice that there is a delay of one day in filing the appeal. In this connection, assessee has filed a condonation of delay petition, explaining the reasons for delay. Considering the submission made in the condonation petition and in the interest of justice, delay of one day is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, an adjournment application was filed. Considering the nature of the case and material available on record, the appeal was proceeded with after hearing the Ld. DR, however, an adjournment application was filed by the assessee which was rejected by this Bench. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee stated to be a school, failed to furnish proper explanation or supporting documents during both assessment as well as appellate proceedings. Therefore, the order of the lower authorities may be upheld. 5. We have heard the submission of the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record, we observed that the assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B due to non-furnishing of the proper

ITA No.63/GTY/2026 Gorkha Pathshala Secondary School details and the additions were primarily made on account of unexplained cash deposit in the bank account. As the assessee has failed to produce supporting documentary evidence both before the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A). However, considering the fact that assessee is stated to be an educational institution and in the interest of substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim with proper evidence. Accordingly, the entire issue is restored to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction that assessee shall furnish all necessary supporting documents and explanation to substantiate its claim regarding cash deposit made during the period. The Assessing Officer shall examine the same afresh in accordance with law, and adequate opportunity of being heard shall be provided to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply to the notices issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer without any fail. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 30th April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 30.04.2026. DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches