VAIBHAV BHARAT PAWAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 22(3)(6), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 29.08.2025 in the matter of an assessment framed by learned Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 22.03.2024.

In the assessment order, Ld. AO disallowed 10% of total purchases as well 10% of sundry creditors on adhoc basis. Though the assessee preferred further appeal, it only made partial submissions during first appeal. Consequently, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. The registry has noted delay of 97 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee on the strength of an affidavit wherein it has been stated that impugned order did not come into the knowledge of the assessee and delay was not willful. The Ld. AR stated that the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case before lower authorities, in case another opportunity of hearing is granted to the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. 4. Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we admit the appeal and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. For this, the assessee is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- to PM Cares fund within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The receipt & requisite proof thereof would be furnished by the assessee to Ld. CIT(A) who would proceed for fresh adjudication accordingly.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 18th June, 2026