PREETHI HARESH HARWANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, IT-OFFICE, VASI RAILWAY STATION BUILDING

आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)"], dated 30.09.2025 for Assessment Year 2016–17, arising out of the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer

2 ITA No. 7808/Mum/2025 Preethi Haresh Harwani under section 147 read with section 144 and section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961[hereinafter referred to as "the Act"] dated 22.02.2024. Facts of the Case 2. In brief, the assessee, an individual, did not file her return of income for A.Y. 2016–17. Based on information flagged under the Risk Management Strategy, it was noticed that she had sold immovable property for Rs.85,00,000/-, deposited cash of Rs.26,01,800/- in bank, and earned interest and commission income aggregating to Rs.4,41,072/-. Consequently, proceedings under section 147 were initiated after following the procedure under section 148A; however, despite issuance of multiple statutory notices, the assessee neither filed any return nor furnished any explanation. In absence of any compliance, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex parte under section 144 and treated the entire sale consideration of Rs.85,00,000/- as short-term capital gains, cash deposits of Rs.26,01,800/- as unexplained money under section 69A, and interest and commission income of Rs.4,41,072/- as income from other sources, determining total income at Rs.1,15,42,872/-. 3. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that due to personal circumstances, including demise of her husband, and service of notices at an old address, she could not comply, and further contended that sale of property resulted in no capital gains and transactions were duly reflected on the portal. However, the assessee did not pursue the appeal or furnish

3 ITA No. 7808/Mum/2025 Preethi Haresh Harwani details despite multiple opportunities. The CIT(A), noting continued non-compliance, proceeded to decide the matter on merits and upheld the assessment, confirming all additions on the ground that the assessee failed to discharge the onus to substantiate her claims. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the additions aggregating to Rs.1,15,42,872/- were sustained.

4 ITA No. 7808/Mum/2025 Preethi Haresh Harwani 6. The Appellant craves leave to add to alter and/or amend all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal. 5. During the course of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the assessee could not effectively represent her case before the lower authorities due to non-receipt of statutory notices on account of an incorrect e-mail ID. It was thus contended that there was reasonable cause for the non- compliance, and in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. The learned Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, fairly stated that he has no objection if the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo consideration. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed position that the assessment in the present case has been completed ex parte under section 144 of the Act on account of non-compliance by the assessee. It is also evident that the first appellate authority has dismissed the appeal substantially on account of non-prosecution, though the additions have been upheld on merits based on the material available on record. 8. At the same time, the contention of the assessee before us is that the statutory notices were not received due to incorrect e- mail ID, and therefore the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from effectively presenting her case before the lower

5 ITA No. 7808/Mum/2025 Preethi Haresh Harwani authorities. We find that the additions made by the Assessing Officer are primarily based on third-party information and absence of explanation from the assessee. No independent verification of the claim of the assessee regarding computation of capital gains, source of cash deposits, and nature of income has been carried out on the basis of supporting evidences, as the same were not furnished. 9. In our considered view, the principles of natural justice require that a reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee, particularly when substantial additions have been made. Considering the explanation offered by the assessee regarding non-receipt of notices and the fact that the additions have been made ex parte, we are of the view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to substantiate her case on merits. 10. We also note that the learned DR has fairly not objected to the restoration of the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. In these circumstances, and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) and restore the entire matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 11. The Assessing Officer is directed to examine the issues afresh in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the proceedings and furnish all necessary details and evidences in support of her claims. It is made clear

6 ITA No. 7808/Mum/2025 Preethi Haresh Harwani that in case of non-cooperation, the Assessing Officer shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.04.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 30/04/2026 Dhananjay, Sr.PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. संबंधधत आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT धिभागीय प्रधतधनधध, आयकर अपीलीय अधधकरण, मुम्बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy// 1. उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai