TANUJ JUNEJA,NARSINGHPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,, NARSINGHPUR

(A) This appeal vide has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 against impugned appellate order dated 27/03/2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1075105054(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].

(B) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee was engaged in the petty sales and purchase business during the financial year 2011-12 and has deposited cash in his bank account amounting to Rs.11,75,035/-. On the basis of information available on record, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and passed assessment order u/s 147 read with section 144 of the Act on 02/12/2019 and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,75,040/- and made addition of Rs.11,75,035/- u/s 69A of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(C) I have heard both sides. I have perused the materials on record. On perusal of records, it is seen that the assessment order as well as the impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A), both were passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee and the assessee’s submissions on merits could not be considered either by the Assessing Officer or by the learned CIT(A). Further, reasonable opportunity of being heard was not provided to the assessee. In view of the foregoing, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and the issues in dispute regarding addition made in assessment order are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

(D) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 28/08/2025)