SOURABH JAIN,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. ITO 1(1), IND, INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH

आदेश/ O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by the order of first-appeal dated 28.10.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of the assessment-order dated 01.07.2024 passed by learned Assessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“Ld. AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2019-20, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

assessee-individual filed his return of AY 2019-20 u/s 139 declaring a total

income of Rs. 14,84,080/- which was assessed. Subsequently, the AO

received an information revealing that the assessee had claimed a deduction

of Rs. 2,75,000/- u/s 80GGC in respect of bogus donation given to a

political party named “Yuva Jan Jagruti Party”. On the basis of information,

the AO issued notice dated 11.04.2023 u/s 148 after completing the

procedure of section 148A. In reply, the assessee re-filed return repeating

the original income of Rs. 14,84,080/-. Thereafter, the AO issued notices

u/s 143(2)/142(1) and raised certain queries. The assessee filed replies

which are noted by AO in assessment-order. However, the AO was not

convinced with assessee’s submission and ultimately made two

additions/disallowances, namely (i) disallowance of deduction of Rs.

2,75,000/- u/s 80GGC relating to donation given to “Yuva Jan Jagruti

Party”, and (ii) disallowance of deduction of Rs. 6,000/- u/s 80G relating to

donation given to “Sewa Sanskar Kendra Trust”. Aggrieved, the assessee

carried matter in first-appeal before CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) observed

that the assessee was given as many as four opportunities of hearing but

the assessee neither filed any submission nor any request for adjournment.

Ultimately, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed assessee’s appeal in limine for non-

prosecution without giving any adjudication. Now, the assessee has come

before us by way of present appeal.

Ld. CIT(A) has noted the details of four hearings given to assessee. Referring

to same, she submitted that although the assessee was unable to make any

submission in response to first three notices of hearing, the last notice given

by Ld. CIT(A) was dated 16.10.2025 in response to which the assessee filed

a detailed reply dated 21.10.2025 vide e-filing acknowledgement No.

279609241261025 on 26.10.2025. Ld. AR further narrated that although

the reply was ready on 21.10.2025 but it could be submitted on 26.10.2025

after the due date of 21.10.2025 fixed by Ld. CIT(A) [Ld. AR asserted in open

court that the due date was 21.10.2025 and not 27.10.2025 as mentioned

by Ld. CIT(A) in Para 6 of impugned order]. However, the Ld. CIT(A) passed

impugned order on 28.10.2025 without considering assessee’s reply which

was available in e-filing portal of Income-tax Department. In nutshell, the Ld.

AR submitted that the assessee filed reply on 26.10.2025, although after

due date of 21.10.2025 fixed by Ld. CIT(A) but before passing of impugned

order dated 28.10.2025.

considered assessee’s reply which was available with him in e-filing portal

before passing of impugned order. But since the Ld. CIT(A) has not done so,

the impugned order of first-appeal passed by Ld. CIT(A) is not a judicious

order and deserves to be set aside. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is

having in his possession, all relevant details and documents and ready to

make an effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). She prayed that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity be given to assessee by way of

restoring this matter at the level of Ld. CIT(A) for a de novo adjudication. She

assured that the assessee shall definitely make a proper and effective

representation before Ld. CIT(A).

restoration, submitted that the assessee had remained non-compliant

during first three hearings and also responded to the fourth and last hearing

after due date fixed by Ld. CIT(A), which has constrained the Ld. CIT(A) to

pass ex-parte order and dismiss assessee’s appeal. It was, therefore,

submitted that while restoring the matter, appropriate directions may be

issued to ensure strict compliance by the assessee.

of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be

caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of Ld. CIT(A),

we restore this matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh, at the

risk and responsibility of assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) shall give necessary

opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order

uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain

vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by Ld.

CIT(A) without seeking unnecessary adjournments failing which the Ld.

CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Ordered

accordingly.

Order pronounced in open court on 24/04/2026

Sd/- Sd/-

(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Indore

िदनांक/Dated : 24/04/2026

Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 5 of 5