NIRVESH ,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. ITO-1(4) SHAHJAHANPUR-1, SHAHJAHANPUR

I.T.A. No.191/LKW/2026 Assessment Year:2017-18 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.191/LKW/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nirvesh Vs. ITO-1(4) C/o CA R. S. Poonia, D-82-B, Sadar Bazar, Shahjahanpur, Siwad Area, Krishna Marg, Bapu Shahjahanpur-242001. Nagar, Jaipur, Jaipur-302015. PAN:AUIPN0364Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Anand Kumar Pandey, Advocate Respondent by Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT (D.R.) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.191/LKW/2026 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 27.06.2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/153978594(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. (B) This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short). The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and in the specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

I.T.A. No.191/LKW/2026 Assessment Year:2017-18 2 (B.1) In this case, the assessment order dated 19.11.2019 was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) whereby the assessee’s total income was determined at Rs.12,39,148/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, addition of Rs.3,80,000/- was made on account of cash deposit u/s 69A of the Act. Further addition of Rs.8,59,148/- was made on account of normal business income of the assessee. The assessee filed appeal in the office of the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal without going into merits of the case. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the aforesaid order of the learned CIT(A). (B) Both sides have been heard. Materials on record have been perused. At the time of hearing, learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not get reasonable opportunity during assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer and during appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A). He further drew attention to the fact, that Ld. CIT(A) dismissed assessee’s appeal for non-prosecution of the appeal, without going into merits of grounds taken by assessee in appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A). He submitted that issues in dispute should be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), with the direction to pass fresh appellate order in accordance with law, on merits of grounds of appeal, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative expressed no objection to this. (C) The Ld. CIT(A) has statutory duty u/s 250(6) of I. T. Act, to pass speaking order on merits of the grounds taken by the assessee in appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A) even if there is non-prosecution of appeal and even if the assessee did not comply with notices issued by office of Ld. CIT(A) during appellate proceedings before Ld. CIT(A). In the present case, Ld. CIT(A) has failed to do so. In view of the foregoing, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and the issues in dispute are restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to pass de novo appellate order in

I.T.A. No.191/LKW/2026 Assessment Year:2017-18 3 accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, ensuring due adherence to provisions of section 250(6) of I. T. Act. (C) In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 29/04/2026)

Sd/. (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Dated: 29/04/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. Concerned CIT D.R. ITAT 4.