TARIQUE AKHLAQUE,LUCKNOW vs. ITO WARD 3(4) , SASARAM
Facts
The assessee filed a return of income declaring Rs. 4,07,997/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, and notices were issued, but the assessee did not comply. The Assessing Officer treated a cash deposit of Rs. 21,42,000/- as income from undisclosed sources. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) but it was dismissed as time-barred.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay, despite the assessee claiming there was no such delay. In the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal as time-barred without considering the merits of the case. Whether the appeal should be restored for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
250, 143(2), 142(1), 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra
आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.09.2025 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 2015–16.
Brief facts of the case of the assessee is an individual and filed his return of Income declaring gross total income of Rs. 4,07,997/-. The case was selected under CASS for limited scrutiny. Consequently,
I.T.A. No.512/Pat/2025 Tarique Akhlaque notices u/s 143(2) & u/s 142(1) were issued. However, no compliance was made by the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act treating the cash deposit of Rs. 21,42,000/- as income from undisclosed sources.
Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but failed to succeed as the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) as barred by limitation of 2305 days in filing the appeal.
Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee has filed the present appeals before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the assessee did not turn up before this Bench although Registry has issued notices to the assessee. As no one turned up at the time of hearing, we cannot keep this appeal pending for inordinate period, therefore, we heard the matters with the assistance of the ld. DR.
The ld. DR supported the impugned order.
We, after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, find that the assessee submitted documents to prove his claim but the ld. CIT(A) solely dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of such delay while the assessee contends that there was no such delay. We, in the interests of natural justice, deem it necessary to restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration after affording opportunity to the assessee of hearing and the ld. CIT(A) will pass a reasoned order after considering the documents submitted by the assessee. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the remand proceedings.
I.T.A. No.512/Pat/2025 Tarique Akhlaque 7. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Kolkata, the 28th January, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/Judicial Member Dated: 28.01.2026. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),
//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches
