MIRNOVA RANGSHA MARAK,WILLIAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GOAL PARA

The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal:

Brief facts of the case are that on perusal of the information available on ‘Insight Portal’, it was noted by the juri ictional Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'AO') that during the period under consideration, the assessee had deposited cash of ₹4,82,50,000/-, and had also made cash withdrawal of ₹21,70,000/- . Further, TDS of ₹31,663/- and TCS of ₹2,26,41,460/- were also reported during the previous year relevant to the AY 2018-19. Since the assessee had not filed the return of income for the AY 2018-19, the assessment was reopened u/s 147 of the Act and the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 31.03.2022 by the Ld. AO requiring the assessee to file the return of income within 30 days of the receipt of the notice. However, the notice was not complied with. The Ld. AO added a sum of ₹4,82,50,000/- u/s 69A of the Act treating the same as unexplained money and ₹31,663/- under the head ‘Income from Other Sources’ for the year under consideration and assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹4,82,81,663/- u/s147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Act. Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide order dated 10.12.2025 dismissed the appeal of the assessee as per his findings as under:

Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee and the appeal was heard with the assistance of the Ld. DR.

We have considered the submissions made by the Ld. DR, gone through the facts of the case and perused the record and the order of ITA No(s). 109/GTY/2026 Assessment Year(s) 2018-19 the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and requested that the same may be upheld.

It was noted by the Bench that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was not condoned and the appeal was dismissed on account of delay without discussing the merits of the case. The Bench was of the view that on the facts mentioned, the delay ought to have been condoned and the appeal should have been decided on merits. After examining the facts of the case and the law, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal before him for disposal of the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee on merits by passing a speaking order as the assessment order was also ex parte and the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is a nonspeaking one who dismissed the appeal on delay yet has discussed the merits of the case and the assessee apparently does not appear to have been granted a reasonable opportunity of being heard and the assessee claims that the income is exempt under section 10(26) of the Act as he is a member of the Scheduled Tribe, residing in Meghalaya, which is a notified area and required evidence in this regard is available. Needless to say, the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to make any further submission he wants to make in support of his grounds of appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments and rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962 shall also be followed and an opportunity of being heard may be provided to the Ld. AO, if required. Accordingly, the grounds taken by the assessee in the appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13th May, 2026. [Sonjoy Sarma] [Rakesh Mishra] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 13.05.2026 Bidhan (Sr. P.S.)

CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi.

CIT-

CIT(DR), Guwahati Benches, Guwahati.

Guard File. //// By order