MOHIT NANDAN AGARWAL,ALIGARH vs. ITO, WARD 4(1)(3), ALIGARH
Facts
The assessee, a non-filer, deposited a significant cash amount in a bank account. The case was reopened, and despite multiple notices from the Assessing Officer and CIT(A), the assessee failed to respond, leading to an ex parte best judgment assessment and an ex parte dismissal of the first appeal.
Held
The tribunal found the assessee's irresponsive attitude unacceptable but, in the interest of justice, remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order after affording the assessee an opportunity of hearing. The assessee was directed to be diligent and cooperative.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the validity of an ex parte assessment and appellate order due to non-compliance by the assessee, and whether a fresh opportunity of hearing should be granted.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 148, Section 142(1), Section 144, Section 250
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. 484/Agr/2025 With SA No. 03 &04/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19
Mohit Nandan Agarwal, Madhu Vs. Income-tax Officer, Villa, Marris Road, Aligarh (UP). Ward 4(1)(3), Aligarh PAN : AAWPA0670N (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Sh. Deepak Singh, Advocate Department by Sh. R.P. Maurya, CIT (A)-1/DR
Date of hearing 17.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 15.01.2026
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal (ITA No. 484/Agr/2025) has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 01.10.2025 passed in
Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10274681 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 2018-19,
wherein learned CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex parte. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee was a non-filer for the assessment year 2018-19. On the basis of the information available with
ITA No.484 with SA No. 03 & 04/Agr/2025
the department, assessee was found to have deposited cash of
Rs.79,86,000/- in his saving bank account with Syndicate Bank. The
case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act. Notice u/s. 148 of the Act was
issued. However, the assessee did not file any return of income in
response thereof. Further, notices u/s. 142(1) and show cause notice u/s.
144 were issued to the assessee, but remained un-responded. Hence,
the Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings on the
basis of available record from the Canara Bank and HDFC Bank and
assessed assessee’s total income at Rs.13,73,83,889/-.
Learned CIT(A) also confirmed the assessment order by
dismissing the assessee’s first appeal ex parte.
Assessee has filed this second appeal on the ground, in addition to
others, that the learned CIT(A) has passed ex parte impugned order
without affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Perused the records and heard learned representative for
assessee and learned DR for revenue.
We find that the learned CIT(A) issued notices dated 25.07.2024,
19.09.2024, 13.03.2025, 20.03.2025, 21.04.2025 and 02.09.2025 to the
assessee for making submissions before the first appellate authority.
Assessee either moved adjournments or remained un-responded during
the first appellate proceedings. Learned CIT(A) was, therefore, 2 | P a g e
ITA No.484 with SA No. 03 & 04/Agr/2025
compelled to pass the impugned ex parte order. It is also noticed that the
Assessing Officer has passed best judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the
Act for want of any response from the assessee. Such an irresponsive
attitude of the assessee is not acceptable. However, in such
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 a fresh. The matter is thus
remitted back to the file of Ld. 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.
The two stay applications were filed in consequence of the
aforesaid appeal ITA No. 484/Agr/2025 with a prayer to stay the
recovery. Since the impugned order has been set aside for statistical
purposes and restored to the file of Assessing Officer, both the stay
applications have become infructuous and are liable to be dismissed.
3 | P a g e
ITA No.484 with SA No. 03 & 04/Agr/2025
In the result, assessee’s appeal, ITA No. 484/Agr/2025 is allowed
for statistical purposes and the stay applications, SA No. 03 &
04/Agr/2025 are dismissed as infructuous.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15.01.2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 15.01.2026 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
4 | P a g e
