ABDUL HAKIM,KHURJA vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(1), BULANDSHAHAR, BULANDSHAHR

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण
िदʟी पीठ “एस एम सी”, िदʟी
ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आअसं.2989/िदʟी/2025(िन.व. 2018-19)
Abdul Hakim
C/o Adv. Arpit Agrawal, Gali No.2, Lalitraj Enclave,
Murari Lal Ka Pench, Khurja, Uttar Pradesh 203131
PAN: ABGPH-1586-F

...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant

बनाम Vs.

Income Tax Officer, Ward -2(3)(1),
Aayakar Bhawan, Bulandshahr,
Uttar Pradesh 203001

..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent

अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/ Appellant by : None
ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. DR

सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing

:
29/07/2025

घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement :
:
24/10/2025

आदेश/ORDER

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 05.03.2025, for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in trading of terracotta pots and livestock (buffaloes). The case was reopened u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) based on information regarding substantial cash deposits and withdrawals in his bank accounts. Despite issuance of several statutory notices, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed non-compliance and completed the assessment u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of 2
the Act. While completing assessment, the Assessing Officer rejected assessee’s books of account u/s.145(3) of the Act and estimated profit at 8% of the turnover of Rs.2,49,49,145/-. Thus, the AO determined total income of the assessee at Rs.19,95,932/-. Against the assessment order dated 26.02.2024, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) vide order dated 05.03.2025 (supra), dismissed appeal of the assessee ex-parte on the ground of non-compliance of notices issued to the assessee.
4. Ms. Sudha Gupta, representing the department, supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee was non-compliant during the assessment, as well as, in appellate proceedings, hence, the CIT(A) rightly dismissed appeal of the assessee.
5. Submissions made by ld. DR heard and orders of authorities below examined. The assessee during assessment proceedings filed submissions in part.
In absence of detailed reply by the assessee, the AO invoked provisions of section 144 of the Act and completed the assessment making addition of Rs.19,95,932/- by estimating GP at 8%. In Fist Appellate proceedings as well the assessee failed to respond to notices dated 07.11.2024, 12.11.2024 and 10.12.2024. In the absence of any contrary material the CIT(A) upheld the assessment order.
Considering entire facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to AO for de novo assessment.
6. The AO shall serve notice to the assessee on the residential address available in the assessment order. The assessee shall respond to the notice served, without fail.

3
7. In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on Friday the 24th day of October,
2025. /-

(VIKAS AWASTHY)

᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 24/10/2025

NV/-

ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant ,
2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent.
3. The PCIT
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी
5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file.

BY ORDER,
////

(Asstt.