KISHORI THAKUR,MADHUBANI vs. ITO, WARD- 3(6), MADHUBANI, MADHUBANI

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.10.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, as per information available with the department, it was noticed that assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.1,72,99,000/- in bank account maintain with ICICI Bank during the year under consideration. However, assessee did not file any return of income for the relevant assessment year. Accordingly, proceedings u/s 147 of the Act were initiated, followed by notice issued

I.T.A. No.589/Pat/2025 Kishori Thakur; AY: 2015-16 u/s 148 of the Act. Subsequently, statutory notices issued u/s 148A(d) and 142(1) along with questionnaire were also issued. Despite service of notices, the assessee failed to comply or furnish any explanation. In absence of compliance, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 133(6) of the Act to the concerned bank and obtained the bank statement. Based on the same, the Assessing Officer treated the entire cash deposit of Rs.1,72,99,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act, and assessed the total income of the assessee accordingly. 3. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, assessee again failed to comply with the notices issued during the appellate proceedings. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Still aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. It has been submitted that the assessee could not properly represent his case before the lower authorities and requested that one more opportunity be granted to present the necessary documents and explanation. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of the lower authorities. 6. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record, it is observed that although notices were duly served upon the assessee during the course assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings. The assessee failed to comply and did not furnish any supporting evidence. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) had no option but to dispose of the appeal based on the material available on record. However, considering the principles of natural justice and in order to provide fair opportunity to the assessee, we are of the view that matter requires

I.T.A. No.589/Pat/2025 Kishori Thakur; AY: 2015-16 reconsideration. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to examine the issue afresh after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate fully and comply with all notices issued and file necessary documents evidence in support of the claim without seeking unnecessary adjournment. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 22nd April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Laxmi Prasad Sahu] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 22.04.2026. DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches