ARISE SHINE EXPORTS & IMPORTS LLP,KADAPA vs. ITO, WARD-1, KADAPA

ITA 2351/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 May 2026AY 2022-234 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution and that additional evidence was filed before the Tribunal. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication on merits, directing the CIT(A) to consider the additional evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT, submitting additional evidence and requesting the matter be set aside to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal dismissed for non-prosecution should be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, especially when additional evidence is produced before the higher tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 46A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A‘ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Shri Ravish SoodShri Madhusudan Sawdia

Hearing: 29/04/2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘A‘ Bench, Hyderabad �ी रिवश सूद,�ाियक सद� एवं �ी मधुसूदन साविड़या लेखा सद� सम� | Before Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA No. 2351/Hyd/2025 (िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2022-23) M/s. Arise Shine Exports Vs. Income Tax Officer & Imports LLP, Ward-1 Kadapa KADAPA PAN:AAZFA1808R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा�रती �ारा/Assessee by: Advocate S. Rama Rao राज� व �ारा/Revenue by: Shri G.V. Pavan Kumar, Sr.AR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing: 29/04/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 06/05/2026 आदेश/ORDER Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

This appeal is filed by M/s. Arise Shine Exports & Imports LLP (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 28.11.2025 for the A.Y. 2022-23. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order of the Ld. CIT (A) is erroneous both on face and in law. 2. the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is arbitrary, non-speaking and liable to be set aside on tis ground alone.

The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of the A.O in disallowing 25% of the purchase expenditure amounting to Rs.7,65,53,581/- and in determining the total income at Rs.10,92,52,151/- which is arbitrary, excessive and unsustainable in law. 4. The Ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the A.O made an ad hoc disallowance of purchase expenditure when the appellant maintained proper books of account and when all the evidences for the expenses are available. 5. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that the purchases were fully supported by invoices, stock records, and bank payments, and that the A.O himself accepted the sales and stock position of the appellant. 6. The Ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciate that merely because certain suppliers had not filed their return of income, the purchases could not be treated as non-genuine or disallowed, especially when the quantity of goods purchased and sold was almost the same. 7. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not appreciating that a substantial portion of the purchases was made from Andhra Pradesh Mineral Development Corporation Limited (APMDC), a Govt. undertaking and no adverse inference could have been drawn in respect thereof. 8. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming an arbitrary estimation of income without any comparable cases, industry norms, or past history of the appellant, rendering the addition unsustainable. 9. Any other ground/grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing”. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company which had filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) dated 26.03.2024 for the assessment year 2022–23. However, during the course of appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not comply with the notices issued. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has also filed

additional evidence before the Tribunal along with a petition for admission of the same. The Learned Authorized Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the additional evidence filed by the assessee goes to the root of the matter and is crucial for deciding the issues involved in the appeal. It was further submitted that the assessee could not present its case before the Ld. CIT(A) on merits and, therefore, prayed that the additional evidence may be admitted and the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of the issues on merits. 5. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) did not make any serious objection to the prayer of the assessee for setting aside the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non-prosecution. We further find that the additional evidence has been filed by the assessee for the first time before this Tribunal. Therefore, the same is required to be verified by the Ld. CIT(A). Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of the appeal on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to consider the additional evidence filed by the assessee in accordance with Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”) and decide the appeal afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to file the additional evidence before the Ld. CIT(A) along with an application for admission of the same in accordance with Rule 46A of the Rules.

The assessee shall not seek any unnecessary adjournments during the appellate proceedings and shall fully cooperate in the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 6th May, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAVISH SOOD) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 6th May, 2026. Vinodan/sps Copy to: S.No Addresses 1 M/s. Arise Shine Exports & Imports LLP, 7/455/89 New Krishna Nagar, Railway Kodur, Kadapa 516101 2 Income Tax Officer Ward -1 Kadapa 3 Pr. CIT - KURNOOL 4 DR, ITAT Hyderabad Benches 5 Guard File By Order

TIRUPATI YAMINI Digitally signed by TIRUPATI YAMINI NAGA MALLESWARI NAGA Date: 2026.05.07 14:31:32 MALLESWARI +05'30'

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →