INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARIPADA, BARIPADA vs. DAYANIDHI PRUSTY, UTHANI NUAGAN

ITA 264/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 May 2026AY 2015-163 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s order unsustainable as it was passed ex parte without evidence and without a remand report. The order was set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer for readjudication after providing an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, running an IMFL shop, did not cooperate with the Assessing Officer, leading to an ex parte assessment where cash deposits were treated as unexplained income. The assessee also failed to appear before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order, passed ex parte and without evidence, was sustainable. The lack of cooperation from the assessee in assessment and appellate proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

None explicitly mentioned, but relates to unexplained income and assessment proceedings.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, CIT-DR

Hearing: 18.05.2026Pronounced: 18.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.264/CTK/2026 Assessment Year: 2015-16 ITO, Ward-1, Baripada Dayanidhi Prusty Vs Sankerko, Badashi, Mayurbhanj, Odisha-757024. (PAN: CGGPP5755F) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 18.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 18.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.NFAC/2014-15/10166802 dated 14.01.2026.

None represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashim Kr. Chakraborty, ld. CIT DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. CIT-DR that the assessee is running IMFL shop. The assessment is an ex parte assessment in so far as the assessee did not cooperate in the assessment proceedings. This has

ITA No.264/CTK/2026

resulted in the cash deposits in the bank account of the assessee being treated as unexplained income of the assessee. It was the submission that on appeal, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte in so far as the assessee has not represented before the ld. CIT(A) also. However, the ld. CIT(A) without any evidence and without calling for remand report from the Assessing Officer directed that 5% of the total cash deposits was to be treated as income of the assessee. It was the submission that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be reversed.

We have considered the rival submissions. We have also perused the orders of the authorities below. A perusal of the facts shows that both the assessment order and the order of the ld. CIT(A) are ex parte. There is non-compliance before the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A). A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the ld. CIT(A) has without any evidence directed the Assessing Officer to assess the income of the assessee at 5% of the total cash deposits. A perusal of the facts also shows that the Assessing Officer has recorded that the assessee has not filed its return of income for the assessment year 2015-16. This being so, we are of the view that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is unsustainable and consequently set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard. If the assessee is not cooperated in the set aside proceedings, liberty is granted to the Assessing Officer to draw adverse inference.

ITA No.264/CTK/2026

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

Kolkata, the 18th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 18.05.2026. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →