Gurpreet Singh vs Income Tax Officer

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

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 30.10.2025, for Assessment Year 2018-19.

The appeal is time barred by 80 days. The assessee has filed an application citing reasons causing delay in filing of appeal. After perusal of the same, I am satisfied that delay in filing of appeal is not intentional, the delay has been caused for the reasons stated in application which appears to be bonafide. Thus, delay of 80 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for decision on merits.

Shri Mukesh Pandey, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee has been employed as a truck driver in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) since 2017. The assessee was working in the UAE under a valid work permit during Financial Year 2017-18. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs.20,00,000/- u/s 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on the presumption that the assessee had paid the said amount in cash to M/s Angels Immigration and Educational Consultant for obtaining a study visa abroad. The ld. Counsel submitted that against the assessment order dated 30.05.2024 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Act, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) purportedly issued three notices to the assessee dated 24.08.2025, 10.10.2025 and 23.10.2025. However, none of the notices issued by the CIT(A) were ever served upon the assessee. Hence, the assessee could not respond to the notices or could make submissions before the CIT(A). The ld. Counsel submits that the assessee has a prima facie good case on merits and, if an opportunity is granted, the assessee would be able to demonstrate that the addition made by the AO is unsustainable.

Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar, representing the department prayed for upholding the impugned order dismissing appeal of the assessee.

Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. The CIT(A), in ex-parte proceedings has upheld the addition of Rs.20,00,000/- made by the AO u/s 69C of the Act. Considering facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the appeal back to the file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.

The assessee shall update his current email address on the official portal of the Department. The CIT(A) shall issue notice to the assessee on email address available in Form No.35 and also on email address available on the official website portal of the Department.

Upon service of notice, the assessee shall respond to the same, without fail.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose in the term aforesaid.