SARANGA ANIL AGGARWAL,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4969/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 October 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, acknowledging the extraordinary circumstances explained by the assessee, including the demise of her husband, subsequent financial crisis of the RNA Group, insolvency proceedings, and numerous litigations, found that the assessee deserved a final opportunity to substantiate her claims. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the appeal to the file of the NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits. This decision was made in the interest of substantial justice and in accordance with section 250(6) of the Act. The NFAC was directed to consider relevant documentary evidence and afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. However, considering the repeated non-compliance despite eight notices, the restoration was made conditional upon the assessee depositing a cost of Rs. 55,000/- with the Revenue Department within 15 days and furnishing proof thereof. The assessee was directed to cooperate fully without seeking unnecessary adjournments. The Tribunal explicitly stated that no opinion had been expressed on the merits of the additions.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Saranga Anil Aggarwal, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) challenging an order dated 26.02.2026 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The NFAC had confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) in an order dated 29.03.2024 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO had made additions totaling Rs. 1,47,18,77,417/- for unexplained unsecured loans and current liabilities, Rs. 79,80,41,994/- for differences in closing stock/work-in-progress, and Rs. 5,20,78,163/- for an increase in proprietor's capital for Assessment Year 2022-23. The NFAC had dismissed the assessee's appeal, primarily due to non-compliance and failure to furnish supporting documentary evidence, after condoning a delay of 42 days.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the NFAC erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal without an effective adjudication on merits, considering the extraordinary circumstances faced by the assessee? Assessee's Contention: The assessee, a senior citizen and widow of the promoter of RNA Group, faced severe financial difficulties, project closures, and numerous legal proceedings following her husband's demise. She was also admitted into insolvency proceedings as a personal guarantor. Due to these personal and financial difficulties, she could not effectively comply with the notices from the NFAC. The assessee argued for restoration of the appeal for adjudication on merits. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue supported the impugned order, submitting that sufficient opportunities were provided to the assessee, which remained unavailed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Respondent: Smt. Basavraj Hiremath, CIT DR
Pronounced: 09.10.2026

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member

This appeal has been preferred by the ASSESSEE against the order dated 26.02.2026, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2022-23. 2. In the instant case, the Assessing Officer, vide assessment order dated 29.03.2024 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, made additions of Rs.1,47,18,77,417/- on account of unexplained unsecured loans and current liabilities, Rs.

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →