RAAS INTRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ITO, DELHI

PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM:

This appeal by assessee is preferred against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi [for short hereinafter referred to as the “(Ld. CIT(A)”]
dated 28.03.2025 arising out of the assessment order of the AO dated 17-12-2019 under section 143(3) of the Income tax Act 1961,(in short “the Act”),for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee had claimed income of Rs. 26,17,065/- as exempt being in the nature of agricultural income. During the assessment proceedings, appellant was asked to submit the details of this exempt income, but no details were submitted before the AO. Accordingly, such income was treated as income from other

ITA No. 3497/ Del/ 2025
RAAS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED
2

sources by the AO and added back to the income. Further, it was noted by the AO that assessee had made aggregate cash deposits at Rs. 11,70,000/- in its bank accounts during the demonetization period i.e. from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2019 for which no explanation was offered before AO. Therefore, these cash deposit were treated as unexplained and added back by the AO. Aggrieved the order of the Assessing officer the assessee, preferred the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide his order dated 28-03-2025 partly allowed the appeal against which the assesse is in appeal before the Tribunal.
5. Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the order of the CIT(A) dated 18.3.2025 is against the principles of natural justice as last two notices dated 11.12.2024 and 07.03.2025 were not validly served on the assessee. It was further submitted that the notices were posted on the portal and no other information was given in the absence of valid communication, the assessee could not respond to the same. Hence, it was requested that the assessee be accorded an opportunity to represent its case before CIT(A) for adjudication of issues disputed under this appeal in respect of agricultural income and demonetization period.
6. The Ld. Departmental representative (DR) could not controvert the aforesaid proposition of the Ld. AR, but he however, relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
7. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. We find considerable cogency in the contention of the Ld. AR for the assessee that the CIT(A)’s order dated 28.3.2025 is against the principles of natural justice as last two notices dated
11.12.2024 and 07.03.2025 were not validly served on the assessee. It is undisputed that the notices were posted on the portal and no other information was given in the absence

ITA No. 3497/ Del/ 2025
RAAS INFRATECH PRIVATE LIMITED
3

of valid communication, the assessee could not respond to the same. Hence, it was requested that the assessee be accorded an opportunity to represent its case before CIT(A) for adjudication of issues disputed under this appeal in respect of agricultural income and demonetization period. Therefore, considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue, afresh, in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and co-operate in the proceedings.
8. In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 01-10-2025. (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN)
JUDICIAL MEMBER

*SR BHATNAGGAR*

Date:- 11.11.2025