Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee firm did not file its income return for AY 2018-19. Information received indicated a cash deposit of Rs.1,10,77,405/- in the bank account. The Assessing Officer reopened the case and added the deposit as unexplained income under section 69A, as the assessee did not comply with the notice issued under section 148.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order without adjudicating the issues on merits and without providing an adequate opportunity for the assessee to be heard. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex parte without proper adjudication on merits and opportunity to be heard is liable to be set aside.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 148, 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Sonjoy Sarma
order
: January 15, 2026 आदेश / ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the CIT(A)-3, Patna u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2018-19.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm and had not filed its return of income for the assessment year 2018-19. An information was received by the Assessing Officer that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.1,10,77,405/- in the bank account during the relevant assessment year. As there was reason to believe that the amount of Rs. 1,10,77,405/- was escaped assessment, the case of the Navyug Nirman Shaikshanik Sansthan assessee was reopened u/s 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961, after getting prior approval of competent authorities. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued dated 30-03-2022 but the assessee did not comply with the said notice and did not file any return of income in response to said notice. The Assessing Officer treated the cash deposits as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act and added the same to the total income of the assessee.
Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the appeal was decided against the assessee due to alleged non-compliance and the CIT(A) passed the order ex parte without adjudicating the issues on merits.
Not satisfied with the order of the CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal, contending that the order passed by the CIT(A) is bad in law and liable to be set aside and the ld. AR prayed before the Bench that in the interest of justice and fair play, the issues raised in the appeal require re-adjudication.
After hearing the rival submissions and on perusal of the materials available on record, we find that the order passed by the CIT(A) is an ex parte order passed without adjudicating on merits and without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In our considered opinion, the ends of justice would be met if the entire matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication 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 to substantiate its claims. In case the assessee fails to comply, the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass an order in accordance with law on the basis of material available on Navyug Nirman Shaikshanik Sansthan record. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.