ASIF ABDULHAK SOUDAGAR,KUMTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2, KARWAR, KARAWAR
Facts
The assessee, engaged in the chicken business, did not file a return for AY 2019-20. The AO, based on information of substantial cash deposits totaling Rs. 9,32,65,100 in bank accounts, initiated reassessment proceedings. Due to non-compliance, the AO estimated business income at 10% of deposits and assessed Rs. 93,26,510, which the CIT(A) upheld ex-parte.
Held
The Tribunal condoned a 77-day delay in filing the appeal and, noting the ex-parte order by CIT(A) despite non-compliance, decided to provide the assessee another opportunity. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 5,000.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the validity of the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders due to non-compliance, and the estimation of undisclosed business income based on cash deposits.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 144, Section 144B, Section 250, Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 133(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH
Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G D PADMAHSHALI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. Nos.145/PAN/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) Asif Abdulhak Soudagar, National e – Vs Soudagar Chicken Centre, Assessment Centre, . Old Fish Market road, Delhi-110001. Kumta, . Uttarakannada-581343, Karnataka. PAN: DIYPS8481L (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)
Assessee by Shri.Subrahmanya Bhat.AR Revenue by Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.DR
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 08.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement 14.01.2026 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the assesse against the order of NFAC/CIT(A) passed u/sec 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s144B of the Act and u/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR brought to the knowledge of the bench, that there is a delay of 77 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the
2 ITA. No.145/PAN/2025 Asif Abdulhak soudagar. assesse has filed the affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is engaged in a business under the name Soudagar Chicken Centre Kumta and the assesee has not filed the return of income for A.Y.2019-2020.The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information from ITBA data analytics NMS found that the assessee has made substantial cash deposits aggregating to (i) Rs.1,34,29,950/- in the bank account maintained with HDFC Bank and (ii) Rs.7,98,35,150/- account maintained with ICICI Bank Limited during the F.Y2018-19. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec148 of the Act and there was no compliance. Further the Assessing Officer has issued notice u/sec142(1) of the Act on the assessee to explain the sources of cash deposits made in the bank accounts and also a show cause notice was issued, but there was no compliance by the assessee. Since, no explanations/details were filed, the AO has issued notice u/sec 133(6) of the Act on the two banks and obtained bank statements of the assessee for F.Y.2018-19. The A.O. based on the bank account statements find aggregate cash deposits are Rs.9,32,65,100/- and relied on the information available on record has invoked the provisions
3 ITA. No.145/PAN/2025 Asif Abdulhak soudagar. of Sec. 144 of the Act and considered the nature of business of the assessee and has estimated the business income undisclosed by the assessee @10% of aggregate cash deposits which works out to Rs.93,26,510/- and finally assessed the total income of Rs.93,26,510/- and passed the order u/sec 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s144B of the Act dated 13.12.2023. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assesse has filed an appeal before the CIT(A), whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and findings of the AO and has issued notices of hearing and since there was no compliance by the assessee to notices. Therefore the CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing officer overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings and profit margin of the assesse s business. Further the Ld.AR mentioned that the assesse has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with the material evidences and prayed for an opportunity to explain before the lower authorities. Per Contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A).
4 ITA. No.145/PAN/2025 Asif Abdulhak soudagar. 6. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima-facie the CIT(A) has passed the order considering the fact that there is no compliance nor appearance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and the notices were issued. Therefore, the CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assesse is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the assessing officer. The CIT(A) has issued the notices of hearing on 10.06.2024,04.11.2024 and 19.12.2024 referred at Page 3 Para3.3 of the order but there was no response and thus the Ld.CIT(A) came to a conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition made by the Assessing Officer and there could be various reasons for non appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, considering the facts, submissions and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to the Income Tax Department within one month from the date of receipt of the order and produce the proof of payment. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the entire disputed issues to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh on merits and the assesse should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information
5 ITA. No.145/PAN/2025 Asif Abdulhak soudagar. for early disposal of appeal. And we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.01.2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMAHSHALI) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Panaji Dated: 14/01/2026
Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar)ITAT, Panaji
6 ITA. No.145/PAN/2025 Asif Abdulhak soudagar. Initial Date 1. Draft dictated on PS 2. Draft placed before author PS
Draft proposed & placed before PS the second member Draft discussed/approved by 4. PS Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the PS Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR Date on which file goes to the 9. Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed
