Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer (A.O.) passed an order under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, treating total credits of Rs.91,60,890/- as unexplained cash under Section 68. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal because the assessee had not complied with notices or filed documentary evidence.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), considering the assessee's claim of suffering from kidney stones and the principles of natural justice, set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The case was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing on merits, granting the assessee a proper opportunity to submit evidence and make submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without affording the assessee a proper opportunity to present evidence, especially considering the assessee's claimed medical condition.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH - DB
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
Date of Hearing: 07.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.11.2025 O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 30.04.2025 for Assessment Year 2017-18.
The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) passed order u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 28.03.2022 treating the total credits of Rs.91,60,890/- as unexplained cash u/s.68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), however, observed that the assessee had neither complied with the notices issued nor filed any documentary evidence in support of its grounds. In view of the above, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and upheld the action of the A.O.
Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.
Before us, the Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the assesseemay be given more chance to adduce evidence and submissions. He further submits that the assessee was suffering from kidney stones hence could not consult the tax consultant regarding status of appeal filed. The Ld. D.R relied upon the order of the ld.CIT(A) and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal.
Though we some extent concur with the submissions of Ld. DR, however, keeping in mind the natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be granted opportunity to file submissions and evidence, if any. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the appeal file to the Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on merits.
The Ld.CIT(A) shall proceed for hearing the appeal on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings on merits as per law. The Ld. AR of the assessee also assured us that the assessee will prosecute the case diligently before the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th November-2025 at Cochin.