GOPAL RAMANAND BANGAD ,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD 1, YAVATMAL, YAVATMAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 408/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 June 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. It found that the NFAC's order did not reflect the mode of service of notices and that the Assessing Officer (AO) had made additions due to lack of documentary evidence. Therefore, the issues were restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 88 days due to the consultant managing the e-portal leaving the job. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) had dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution without reflecting the mode of service of notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC's dismissal for non-prosecution was valid without proper service of notices, and whether the additions made by the AO were justified without adequate opportunity for the assessee to present evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

For Appellant: Ms. Veena Agrawal, CA
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, CIT-DR
Hearing: 10.06.2026Pronounced: 10.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 408/NAG/2025 (Assessment Year : 2018-19) Goapl Ramanand Bangad ITO, Ward-1, Yavatmal Athwadi Bazar, Tq-Darwha vs Bori, Bori ARab, S.O. Yavatmal, Yavatmal. PAN : ABCPB 5285 H Assessee Revenue Assessee by : Ms. Veena Agrawal, CA Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 10.06.2026 Date of pronouncement : 10.06.2026 O R D E R PER BENCH:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 10/01/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is emanating from the assessment order dated 20.03.2023

ITA No. 408/NAG/2025 (Goapl Ramanand Bangad) passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.

2.

On hearing both the sides, we find that the present appeal is filed with a delay of 88 days and the assessee had filed an affidavit along with application submitting that e-portal was managed by the Consultant, who had left the job. Considering the delay is not of substantial period and the assessee is an individual, delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

3.

Further, on perusal of the impugned order of NFAC, we find that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed for non-prosecution and the order does not reflect the mode of service of notices to the assessee.

4.

At the same time, we find that before the Ld. AO also, the assessee had not provided documentary evidence in respect of cash sales etc., therefore, addition u/s. 68 and other additions were made.

5.

In the light of the aforesaid, we consider it appropriate case to restore the issues on merits as well as on law to

ITA No. 408/NAG/2025 (Goapl Ramanand Bangad) the file of Ld. AO for fresh adjudication. Before framing the assessment, Ld. AO shall give the assessee an adequate opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case. Corresponding ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court on 10.06.2026 sd/- sd/- ANUBHAV SHARMA KHETTRA MOHAN ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 10/06/2026 vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order Vukkem Digitally signed by Vukkem Rambabu Rambabu Date: 2026.06.11 10:24:57 +05'30' Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →