MD ABDUL RAFIK,TEZPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

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 No.99/GTY/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Md Abdul Rafik…………………………………………………..…..Appellant M/s Papu Hardware Napam Tezpur, Sonitpur Assam-784001 [PAN: AGUPR0228B] vs. DCIT/ ACIT Central Circle-2, Guwahati…………..……...…..…..Respondent Assam-781005 Appearances by: Shri Shekhar Agarwal, CA, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : May 14, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : May 18, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.02.2025 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 2017-18. 2. The assessee has preferred the appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 277 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the reasons stated therein, we are satisfied that there was a reasonable cause which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Accordingly, the delay of 277 days is condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits.

ITA No.99/GTY/2026; A.Y: 2017-18 Md Abdul Rafik 3. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee is an individual who did not file his return of income for the assessment year under consideration. Information was received by the department that the assessee had purchased motor vehicle amounting to Rs.34,84,000/- and deposited cash amount to Rs.1,17,21,000/- in the bank account. Apart from the above, assessee had also appeared into a transaction of which TCS amounting to Rs.1012/- was reflected. Accordingly, proceedings u/s 147 of the Act were initiated and the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. However, in response to the notices issued during the assessment proceedings, the assessee did not file return of income and only certain replies were submitted. Consequently, the assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 and 144B of the Act, by determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,52,49,480/-. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 40 days. Notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(A) fixing the matter for hearing on three consecutive dates. However, the assessee failed to comply with the said notices and did not furnish any reply or supporting documents. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) sustained the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Still aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and the Assessing Officer has made addition without properly examine the facts of the case. Therefore, it was prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer and one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to substantiate the claim with supporting documents. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of the authorities below.

ITA No.99/GTY/2026; A.Y: 2017-18 Md Abdul Rafik 7. We, after hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record. We notice that assessee failed to comply before the Assessing Officer in order to substantiate the claim despite sufficient opportunities having been granted. Therefore, Assessing Officer had no other option but to treat the entire unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and the unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act. Even before the Ld. CIT(A), assessee failed to furnish supporting documents, however, the conduct of the assessee before the Tribunal also reveals delay of 277 days in filing the appeal which shows that assessee was reluctant in pursuing the matter before the authorities. However, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the issue afresh, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all necessary supported documents and cooperate in the proceedings without any delay. At the same time, considering the conduct of the assessee in repeatedly remain absent before the authorities below and consuming the valuable judicial time, we impose a nominal cost of Rs.1,000/- upon the assessee which shall be deposited with the Income Tax Department. The assessee shall furnish proof of such deposits before the Assessing Officer and thereafter Assessing Officer shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 18th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 18.05.2026. DP, PS

ITA No.99/GTY/2026; A.Y: 2017-18 Md Abdul Rafik 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