RAJENDRA ANNASAHEB MASUTE HUF,KOLHAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Even on the previous date of hearing fixed on 12.06.2025, 24.07.2025 and 26.08.2025 neither the assessee nor any Authorised Representative represented the assessee. We therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and material available on record. Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of hearing : 08.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 27.10.2025 Rajendra Annasaheb Masute HUF

We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessment year in the case of assessee HUF for A.Y. 2021-22 has been framed u/s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act as Best Judgment assessment and addition of Rs.54,91,038/- has been made against the Nil income declared in the income-tax return filed on 31.12.2021. Assessee has preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but the assessee failed to respond to the notices of hearing resulting into dismissal of appeal. Before ld.CIT(A) also, assessee has not responded even though six opportunities were granted. Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Chemipol Vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009. We however considering the fact that assessee has declared income from Agriculture showing gross receipts at Rs.54,91,038/- and claimed expenditure of Rs.25,04,475/-. Ld. AO has not considered the expenditure incurred for agricultural operations and has also not accepted the gross agricultural receipts and treated it to be unexplained income u/s.69 of the Act. In the statement of facts filed before ld.CIT(A), it has been stated that due to medical reasons Karta of HUF could not file submissions before ld.AO and even before ld.CIT(A). Considering the facts of the case and also in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the assessee. We therefore without dwelling into merits of the case, remit all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A). Needless to mention that in the set aside proceedings ld.CIT(A) shall afford Rajendra Annasaheb Masute HUF

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune.

गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,