ASHTVINAYAK DEVELOPERS,WARDHA ROAD VIVEKANAND NAGAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 260/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 June 2026AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found it appropriate to restore the issues to the Assessing Officer. The assessee is to be given a fresh opportunity of hearing to pass an order afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was directed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2015-16. The assessee was proceeded ex-parte before the CIT(A) and the ITAT, with the Assessing Officer making additions based on information despite an income surrender during survey proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was properly served notice and given an adequate opportunity of hearing before the First Appellate Authority, and if not, whether the matter should be remanded for a fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

For Appellant: Shri RK Ganeriwali, CA
For Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR
Hearing: 09.06.2026Pronounced: 09.06.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 10/03/2025 passed under section 250 of the

ITA No. 260/NAG/2025 (Asthivinayak Developers) Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16.

2.

On hearing both the sides, we find that the assessee was proceeded ex–parte during the First Appellate Authority proceedings and before us. Ld. Counsel has relied on the paper book containing various evidences to contest the additions made by Ld. Assessing Officer.

3.

It appears from the assessment order that out of survey proceedings, income was surrendered, however, Assessing Officer was not satisfied and based upon certain information, proceeded to make the additions. Ld. CIT(A) records in the impugned order of issuance of notice on specific e–mail address, however, detail of same are not there and the Form– 35 mentions of the e–mail, but also mentions that the assessee had mentioned notices being not served by e–mail.

4.

In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we consider it an appropriate case to restore the issues to the files of Assessing Officer to give afresh

ITA No. 260/NAG/2025 (Asthivinayak Developers) opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass an order afresh.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open Court on 09.06.2026 Sd/– Sd/– ANUBHAV SHARMA KHETTRA MOHAN ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 09/06/2026 Z.U, P.S Copy to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order

Sr.PS/PS ITAT, Nagpur

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →