RIZWAN ,BELLARY vs. DC/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BELLARY

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is selling vegetables in APMC on behalf of farmers and getting commission. Based on the cash deposits in Bank, 147 proceedings initiated and at that time the assessee field his return of income. The AO not accepted the explanation and estimated the income u/s. 44AD of the Act. The assessee filed the appeal

As against the said order, the assessee filed this appeal before this Tribunal.

At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the delay was properly explained but the Ld.CIT(A) without considering the issue on merits, had rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation, which is not correct. The Ld.AR also submitted that this Hon’ble Tribunal, for the A.Y. 2015-16, had condoned the similar delay and filed the copy of the order in ITA No. 2749/Bang/2025 dated 17/04/2026 and prayed to grant one more opportunity.

The Ld.DR submitted that the assessee had not explained the delay properly and therefore the order is to be upheld.

We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.

We have perused the assessment order in which the addition was made based on the cash deposits. The assessee had explained that he is a commissioning agent selling the goods of the farmers in APMC Yard and also produced the sale pattis and the bank statements. We have also perused the earlier order of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2015-16, in which the similar delay has been condoned and remitted this issue to the file of the AO.

Considering the fact that addition was made on estimation and also the records submitted by the assessee was not properly considered by the AO, we deem it fit to remit this appeal also to the file of the AO for denovo consideration.