MALLIK SAKILA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 09.09.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and the assessee is engaged in the business of retail seller of IMFL and country liquor during the period under consideration. The assessee filed his return of income and declaring income of Rs.34,22,363/- for the A.Y. 2022-23. The Assessing Officer issued notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) and the assessee has furnished her replies. However, in the absence of Mallik Sakila proper stock records and quantitative details of purchases and sales of different brands for verification without supporting documents, the Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs.2,91,81,411/- (profit of Rs.2,91,81,411/- @15% is considered on total turnover of Rs. 19,45,42,740/-) and added to the total income of the assessee.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as the assessee failed to file written submission despite serving various notices.

Dissatisfied with the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has now preferred an appeal before the Tribunal by submitting that the ld. CIT(A) has not considered the submissions made by the assessee and simply upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. He, therefore, prayed that in the interest of justice and fair play, the appeal may be remitted back to the file of the lower authorities for re-examination.

We have heard the submissions of the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We note that it is evident that the ld. CIT(A) failed to consider documents furnished by the assessee. Cconsidering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to substantiate its claims with supporting evidence. Accordingly, the entire matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to examine the issues afresh on merits, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate fully and furnish all necessary supporting documents. In case of failure to Mallik Sakila comply with the notices issued by the CIT(A), the appellate authority shall be at liberty to pass an order in accordance with law on the basis of material available on record.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 14th January, 2026.