GARIMA CONSTRUCTION,RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.483/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Garima Construction………….……………............................……….……Appellant M/11 Bariatu Housing Colony Bariatu Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834009. [Pan: Aasfg5282A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Ranchi...…...…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 06, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.07.24 Of The Nfac, Delhi For The Assessment Year 2022–23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of Real Estate Development. For The Assessment Year Under Consideration, The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income Declaring Total Income Of ₹1,87,050. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny On The Basis Of Information Received Through The Criu Portal Pursuant To A Search Operation Conducted On One Shri Naresh Kejriwal, Who Was Identified As A Hawala Entry Operator. Based On Such Information, It Was Alleged That The Assessee Had Received Accommodation Entries Amounting To ₹20,50,000 & ₹1,95,61,000/- During The Relevant Year. During The Assessment Proceedings, The Assessee Submitted Details & Supporting Documents To Substantiate The Genuineness Of The Transactions. However, The Assessing Officer Was Not Satisfied With The Explanation

90 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition explaining the reasons for delay, stating that the assessment and appellate orders were served on an old e-mail address that was no longer in use. The assessee came to know about the passing of the impugned order only in the first week of December