SANDIP TUKARAM SISAL ,SANGLI vs. ITO WD-3 , SANGLI

The grievance of the assessee is solely against the addition u/s.69A of the Act made by the Assessing Officer for unexplained money at Rs.3,02,18,058/-.

We have heard both the sides and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of retail trading in Fertilizers, Pesticides and Seeds. Income of Rs.5,16,960/- declared in the return for A.Y. 2016-17 furnished on 16.10.2016. Reassessment proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act carried out and addition for unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act at Rs.3,02,18,058/- has been made. Though the assessee challenged the addition before ld.CIT(A) but then due to circumstances beyond control the assessee could not appear on the three dates of hearing. We observe that vide adjournment application dated 21.01.2026 assessee sought 15 days time and accordingly the compliance date would fall on 05.02.2026, however, before the date of compliance ld.CIT(A) passed the impugned order on 03.02.2026 itself dismissing the assessee’s appeal for non-prosecution without dealing with merits of the case.

We have gone through the submissions filed by the assessee contending that the assessee has been consistently carrying on business for several years. It has also been claimed that assessee made regular payments to suppliers and regular receipts from customers are deposited in the bank account. Bank deposits represents business receipts and the credits are duly explainable and they have been duly recorded in the books of account. We have also perused the documents furnished by the assessee in the paper book running into 214 pages providing details of income tax returns of the past years, documents exhibiting the license for carrying out Sale of Seeds and Pesticides, purchase and sale bills, transportation bills etc. Ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A) but did not strongly object for restoring the issues to the file of ld.CIT(A).

Considering the entire factual matrix and the details provided by the assessee in support of its grounds of appeal, we are of the considered view that assessee deserves one more opportunity. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues raised in the instant appeal are restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to update email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assesssee is allowed for statistical purposes.