Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA
Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Amisha S. Gupta, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 18/08/2025 Date of Pronouncement 27/08/2025 ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Gurgaon (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short), dated 25/11/2022 for the Assessment Year 2015-16.
None appeared for the Assessee right from the day one. The records reveals that notice has been served to the Assessee through the Department, however, the Assessee failed to appear before the Tribunal. Considering the issue involved in the present Appeal, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and perusing the material available on record.
3.The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that,protective additions have been made in the case of the Assessee,which have been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A) vide order impugned and the same is under challenge by the Department. Further submitted that, substantive additions have been made in the case of Sh. Atul Tyagi. The Ld. Department's Representative based on the information provided by the A.O. conveyed the Bench that, as against substantive addition, the said Sh. Atul Tyagi preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) in Appeal No. 10458 and the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 28/11/2022, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee and as per the records, the said Sh. Atul Tyagi has not preferred any Appeal before the Tribunal.
The submission made by the Ld. Department's Representative is placed on record. Considering the fact that the substantial addition made in the hands of Sh. Atul Tyagi has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and no Appeal has been preferred by the Sh. Atul Tyagi, as the substantial addition made by the A.O. in the hands of Sh. Atul Tyagi reached finality, the present Appeal filed by the Assessee challenging the protective addition does not survive. Therefore, the present Appeal preferred by the Assessee is dismissed for having become in-fructuous with a liberty to the parties to get the present order recalled if so required/advised.