ANIRUDH KOTHARI (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 50(1),, KOLKATA

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.05.2025 of the NFAC, Delhi (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 2022–23.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a HUF and return of income was filed for the assessment year under consideration declaring a total income of Rs.3.55 lacs. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment determining total income at Rs.11.93 crore by passing an order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act.

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.

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 the direction to adjudicate the matter afresh after considering the documentary evidences/details which will be submitted by the assessee during the remand proceedings. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings by producing supporting documents/details to substantiate the claim of the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 28th January, 2026.