KRISHNA KUMAR GUPTA,ETAH vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, DELHI
Facts
The assessee, engaged in wholesale cement trading, had declared a certain income. The case was reopened under section 147 due to a discrepancy of Rs. 2,98,57,958/- found during an investigation. The Assessing Officer made an addition under section 68 based on this discrepancy.
Held
The ITAT noted that the CIT(Appeals) passed an ex parte order without substantial discussion on merits. The tribunal also observed that the original assessment order was passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B due to the assessee's non-response.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in confirming additions without a substantial discussion on merits and whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to present submissions before the Assessing Officer.
Sections Cited
250(6), 147, 68, 158BBE, 144, 144B, 143(2), 142(1), 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 401/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15
Krishna Kumar Gupta, 157, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Kailash Ganj, Etah (UP). Ward 4(3)(1), Etah. PAN :AGZPG4047N (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by None Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 17.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 17.12.2025
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 24.03.2024 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2013-14/10168836 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250
of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2014-15, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex parte.
At the very outset, it is noticed that this appeal has been filed on 06.08.2025 against the impugned order dated 24.03.2024 by a delay of about 440 days. In his condonation application, the assessee has
ITA No.401/Agr/2025
assigned the reason for delay that on account of the assessee being an
illiterate person, having no knowledge of computer operation and wrong
advice of his legal consultant at Etah, the appeal could not be filed within
the prescribed period of limitation. The delay is neither deliberate nor
intentional. Prayed to condone the delay. The averments made in the
delay condonation application are supported by uncontroverted affidavit
of the assessee. In the interest of justice we condone the delay caused in
filing this appeal before ITAT.
Brief facts state that the appellant assessee is engaged in the
wholesale trading business of cement and filed his return of income on
15.10.2014 declaring total income at Rs.4,47,150/-. The assessee had
declared gross profit at Rs.27,08,733/- and Net Profit of Rs.5,45,681/- out
of total turnover of Rs.10,70,72,753/-. Based on the information received
from insight portal, case of the assessee was reopened u/s. 147 of the
Act on the basis of verification suspicious transaction report dated
26.02.2020 uploaded by ADIT (Inv.) Aligarh and investigation regarding
cash deposit/bank credits in the bank account of assessee was made
with reference to the transactions/turnover declared by the assessee,
during which a discrepancy of Rs.2,98,57,958/- was found. Notice u/s.
148 of the Act was issued. Assessee filed return dated 27.04.2021 in
response thereof. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act 2 | P a g e
ITA No.401/Agr/2025
were issued on various occasions, but the assessee did not respond
thereto. The Assessing Officer, therefore, made addition of
Rs.2,98,57,958/- u/s. 68 of the Act and taxed the same as per provisions
of section 158BBE of the Act vide assessment order dated 22.03.2022
passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Act.
Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.
CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex parte.
The appellant assessee has filed this appeal on the ground that Ld.
CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the additions made by the
Assessing Officer by passing impugned ex parte order, ignoring the fact
of ill health of assessee’s accountant, who ultimately died on 19.02.2024,
due to which the appellant could not present his case either before the
Assessing Officer or before the first appellate authority.
Learned DR supported the orders of authorities below.
Perusal of the impugned order shows that the learned first
appellate authority issued various notices to the assessee on
01.03.2024, 08.03.2024, 14.03.2024 and 19.03.2024, but the assessee
filed no response thereto. We, however, note that the ld. CIT(Appeals)
has passed ex parte impugned order without any substantial discussion
on merits, which is not in consonance with the spirit of section 250(6) of
the Act, whereas learned CIT(Appeals) was expected to state the points 3 | P a g e
ITA No.401/Agr/2025
for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the decision as
provided therein. Perusal of assessment order also shows that due to
irresponsive conduct of the assessee, learned Assessing Officer was
compelled to pass best judgment assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 and
sec. 144B of the Act. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice,
we deem it just and proper to afford an opportunity of hearing to the
appellant assessee to make his submissions before the Assessing
Officer. The matter is thus remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer
for passing order afresh in accordance with law after taking assessee’s
submissions into consideration. We further direct the assessee to be
diligent and cooperative in attending the proceedings and making
submissions before the learned Assessing Officer for the expeditious and
effective disposal. Needless to say that learned Assessing Officer shall
ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is
thus liable to be allowed for statistical proposes.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17.12.2025 and reduced in writing on this 23 day of December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 17.12.2025 *aks/- 4 | P a g e
ITA No.401/Agr/2025
