Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's case was reopened, and the Assessing Officer added Rs.5,89,01,108/- for unexplained expenditure due to bogus purchases. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte due to non-compliance.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, noting that the CIT(A) passed the order without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
69C, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
order
: February 18, 2026 ORDER
Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.09.2024 of the NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2018– 19.
The appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 254 days and the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay. After going over the said affidavit, we find sufficient reasons behind the delay and consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits.
Brief facts of the case are that the case of the assessee was reopened and the Assessing Officer found that the assessee claimed Ankur Jain bogus purchases from shell entities through bogus transactions. After considering the submission of the assessee, the Assessing Officer added Rs.5,89,01,108/-as variation in respect of issue of unexplained expenditure u/s 69C of the Act.
3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) wherein the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an ex parte order due to non-compliance.
Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before us. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR without going into the merits of the case submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Ld. AR therefore prayed for one fresh opportunity to be given to produce relevant details/documents to prove his case.
The Ld. DR did not make any objection to the above proposal of the ld. AR.
We have considered the submissions of the counsels of the respective parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessee failed to produce relevant documentary evidences and during the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing. Under the circumstances and on the request of the assessee, in the interest of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to adjudicate the matter afresh considering all relevant documents/details. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings by producing supporting documents/details to substantiate the claim of the assessee.
Ankur Jain 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 28th February, 2026.