Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed its return of income and was later found to have taken an unsecured loan. Due to non-compliance in verifying the loan, the Assessing Officer treated it as an unexplained cash credit and added it to the assessee's income.
Held
The Tribunal restored the appeal to the Assessing Officer, directing fresh adjudication after giving the assessee sufficient opportunity for hearing and examination of documents.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied natural justice due to an ex-parte order and if the appeal should be remanded for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
250, 68, 46A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
order
: December 10, 2025 ORDER
Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.06.2025 of the CIT(Appeal)-51, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”) passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012–13.
Brief facts of the case are that in this case, the assessee filed original return of income on 12.12.2012 claiming a total income of Rs. 13,230/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny and various statutory notices issued. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has taken unsecured loan of Rs.1,11,42,174/- during the assessment year. Due to prolonged non-compliance on the part of the assessee to verify the loan transaction, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and added this to the total income of the assessee.
Prominent Tradelink Pvt. Ltd 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal has been dismissed by passing an ex parte order as there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee on different dates fixed by the ld. CIT(A).
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee has come in appeal before us. The ld. AR argued that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte without going into the merits of the case by simply upholding the order of the Assessing Officer. He therefore prayed for one more opportunity by restoring the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration by affording opportunity to the assessee of hearing.
The ld. DR did not raise any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer.
After hearing the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties and perusing the orders of the lower authorities, it appears to us that there was no compliance before the ld. CIT(A) which has resulted into passing the ex-parte order by the ld. CIT(A). We find that the assessee filed certain explanations and evidences during the assessment proceedings but the Assessing Officer only made the addition due to non-compliance on the part of the assessee. Under the circumstances, in the interest of natural justice, we are inclined to restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to adjudicate the matter afresh after affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee of hearing and examining the explanations and documents which will submit by the assessee during the remand proceeding. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings by submitting all evidences/documents and if necessary, the assessee may file new evidences u/r 46A of the I.T. Rules to substantiate his case.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Kolkata, the 10th December, 2025.