Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. M. BALAGANESH & SH. SUDHIR KUMAR
Date of hearing: 11/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 28/10/2025 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM:
This appeal by assessee is preferred against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal Addl/JCIT (A) Bhopal [for short hereinafter referred to as the “(Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 13.01.2025 arising out of the assessment order of the AO dated 22-12-2019 under section 1 Year 2017-18.
2 .The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal:
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO and sustaining the addition to the extent of Rs. 10,01,94,260/-.
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in determining and adding unexplained cash credit u/s 68 to the tune of Rs. 9.99.45.856/- consists of ; (a) Share Application Money Of Rs. 8,70,00,000/- (b) Cash Deposit in Bank Account of Rs. 39,40,000/- (c) Unsecured Loan of Rs. 90,05,856/- all together aggregating to Rs. 9.99.45.856/-
3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in determining by adding the ad-hock disallowance of expenses to the tune of Rs. 2,25,317/-.
4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in determining by adding Rs. 23,083/- u/s 14 A read with rule 8D.
The appeal is time barred by 36 days. The Ld. AR stated that appeal should be filed by 14-03-2025 but filed by the 36 days delay, viral fever. The director of the company Sh. Raju Khan has filed the affidavit in which he explained the cause of delay. The assessee has shown the sufficient cause for not filing the appeal with in time, therefore, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.
4.The brief facts of the case are that assessee is a Limited Company and filed its return of income for the A.Y.2017-18 on 30-10-2017 declaring total income of Rs. 1,48,210/-/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued.
Subsequently notices under section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued, The Assessing officer completed the assessment after making the addition on various heads and assessed the income at Rs. 10,03,42,470/- Aggrieved the order of the Assessing officer the assessee, preferred the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide his order dated 13-01-2025 dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution against which the assesse is in appeal before the Tribunal.
Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and appeal was dismissed for non - 3 Quantum Global Securities Ltd..vs ITO prosecution. The Ld. CIT(A) was supposed to decide the appeal on merits as per the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act.
The Ld. Departmental representative (DR) pointed out that the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) after filing the appeal . The appeal was rightly rejected. 7. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Since in the instant case the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution and has not decided the appeal on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merit as per the provision of the section 250(6) of the Act. 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 issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and co-operate in 4 accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28-102025.