KRISHNA CHANDRAKAR, BHILAI,DURG vs. ITO-2(1), BHILAI, BHILAI

Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “(1) The reassessment order passed by AO is illegal and bad in law. Ld. CIT(A) in upholding validity of reassessment order. (2) Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs.30,70,000/- made by AO on account of cash deposits in bank accounts of appellant invoking sec.

The relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee is a proprietor of M/s Kunal Traders. She filed her Income Tax Return (‘ITR’) of the relevant year on 15.01.2022 declaring income of Rs.4,99,940/-. The assessee has also declared agricultural income of Rs.5,84,668/-. Based on the incriminating information in possession of the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) reopened the case under section 148 of the Act. In response, the assessee filed her ITR on 17.09.2024 declaring income to Rs.8,58,150/-. Thereafter, consequential assessment was completed under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act determined the income at Rs.89,75,750/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed all additions made by the Ld. Assessing Officer (‘AO’) as under: “Conclusion:

1 Before parting, it is pertinent to note that although several opportunities were afforded during the appellate proceedings, the appellant failed to file any effective written submissions or documentary evidence controverting the findings recorded in the assessment order. The appeal has, therefore, been decided on the basis of the assessment records and the material available on record. In the absence of any cogent evidence rebutting the findings of the Assessing Officer, I find not infirmity in the assessment order warranting interference.

2 In view of the foregoing discussion, I hold that the Assessing Officer has correctly appreciated the facts and law while making the additions under section 69A, 68 and 56(2)(x) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The reassessment proceedings have also been validly initiated in accordance with law. Accordingly, the additions made in assessment order are confirmed.”

Before us, Shri R. B. Doshi, CA, Ld. Authorized Representative (‘AR’) of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had decided the appeal ex-parte due to non-prosecution. Non-compliance on the part of the assessee was the sole reason for dismissal of the appeal, the Ld. Counsel submitted. He prayed for remanding the case back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

Shri Piyush Tripathi, Ld. Sr. DR, drawing our attention to various paras of the orders of Authorities below, submitted that the reasonable opportunities of being heard had been provided to the appellant assessee by the Authorities below. However, the appellant assessee did not ensure any compliance before the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. He prayed for dismissal of the appeal. On our specific query, he reluctantly admitted for remanding the case back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merit.

We have heard both parties and have perused the material available on the record. We have taken note of the non-compliance of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) (para 4.1 of the impugned order). In such circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) has no choice except to dispose of the appeal to meet his/her monthly target of disposal of appeals. However, in the interest of justice and fairness, we, without offering any comment on merit of the case, find the impugned order deem fit to set aside and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT (A) for deciding the case afresh/denovo, in accordance with the law, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We order accordingly. Needless to say that the appellant assessee has to cooperate in remitted appellate proceedings in this case.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as above. Order pronounced in the open court on 29/10/2026. (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA) "ाियक सद" / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद" / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; िदनांक Dated 29/10/2026 HKS, PS आदेशकी "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant

""थ"/ The Respondent

The Pr. CIT, Raipur (C.G.) 4. िवभागीय "ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, रायपुर/ DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. गाड" फाईल / Guard file.