Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed their return for AY 2017-18 showing an income of Rs. 9,20,820. The assessment was completed with an addition of Rs. 2,02,76,735 for unexplained cash credit. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte.
Held
The tribunal noted that the delay in filing the appeal was due to unusual circumstances and condoned it. The tribunal found that the assessee failed to produce evidence during assessment and appellate proceedings, leading to an ex parte order by the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal and whether to remand the matter for fresh adjudication considering documentary evidence.
Sections Cited
250, 143(2), 142(1), 143(3), 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
order
: January 08, 2026 ORDER
Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.02.2024 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 2017–18.
The appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 528 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay, which is self-explanatory. After going over the said affidavit, we find that the delay was occurred due to unusual circumstances which was beyond the control of the assessee 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 assessee is an individual and filed the return of income for A.Y.2017-18 showing a total income of Tonmoy Sadhukhan Rs.9,20,820/-. The return was selected for scrutiny through CASS and notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued. The assessment of the assessee was completed u/s 143(3) by making an addition of Rs.2,02,76,735/- towards unexplained cash credit u/s 69A of the Act in respect of deposits made by the assessee in the bank accounts during demonetization period.
Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) wherein the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by passing an ex parte order on the ground of non-compliance on behalf of the assessee.
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 an ex parte order without going into the merits of the case. 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 to the various notices issued during the assessment proceedings in order to explain the source of cash deposits and during the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) passed an order ex parte in the absence of proper representation on behalf of the assessee. Under the circumstances and on the request of the assessee, in the interest of substantive 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 and will pass 2 Tonmoy Sadhukhan a speaking order in accordance with law. 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 8th January, 2026.