AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal by the assessee is directed against an exparte order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘CIT(A)’] dated 29.12.2025, for assessment year 2020-21.
The appeal is time barred by 31 days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. After perusal of same, I am satisfied that the delay in filing of appeal is not deliberate. The delay in filing of appeal was for the reasons stated in said application, which appears to be bonafide. Hence, delay of 31 days in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing.
Shri Rajesh Kumar Goel, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the AO in reassessment proceedings has made addition of Rs. 43,56,808/- on mere estimations. Narrating facts of the case, the ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee is a commission agent of general merchant goods. The assessee filed his return of income for assessment year 2020-21 declaring total income of Rs. 3,94,290/-. Return was processed u/s. 143(1). The returned income was accepted. Thereafter, the assessment for assessment year 2020-21 in the case of assessee was reopened on the ground that there were cash deposits to the tune of Rs. 4.64 crores in assessee’s bank account with State Bank of India. The assessee explained that the cash deposits were from cash sales. The assessee is a wholesale trader and is engaged in trading of goods under the name and style of ‘Mittal General Store’. The assessee earns commission on wholesale trading of goods ranging between 1.50% to 2%. In the impugned assessment year, the assessee has declared commission @1.59%. In preceding assessment year, the assessee had declared commission income @1.60% approximately and the same was accepted. The AO on presumptions, without any basis has estimated commission @8%. Against the assessment order dated 19.2.2025 passed u/s. 147 read with section 144B of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The CIT(A) in exparte proceedings has confirmed the addition.
The Counsel submits that estimation of commission @8% of the total bank credits by the AO lacks merits as the assessee during the assessment proceedings has furnished books of accounts. The AO has not pointed any error in the books of accounts.
Per contra, Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR representing the department vehemently defended the assessment order. Reiterating findings of the AO and the CIT(A), he prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee.
Both sides heard. Orders of the lower authorities examined. A perusal of assessment order reveals that the AO has estimated commission @8% as against 1.59% declared by the assessee. I find that the impugned order of the CIT(A) has been passed in exparte proceedings. Considering entire facts, I deem it proper to restore this appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after affording reasonable opportunity of making submission to the assessee, in accordance with law.
The assessee shall furnish current/operational email address to the department for issuance of notice by the CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee upon service of notice from the CIT(A) shall respond to the same, without any fail.
In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.