Sanjay Kumar vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

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 11.09.2025, for AY 2018-19.

The Id. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee had started a small business of sale of confectionery items i.e. papad, snacks, etc. The assessee had filed his return of income for AY 2016-17 u/s.44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') declaring total income of Rs.2,77,560/-. Thereafter, for next two assessment years i.e. 2017-18 & 2018-19, since the assessee had meagre income, no return of income was filed by the assessee. The assessee again filed return of income for AY 2019-20 u/s.44AD of the Act declaring income of Rs.2,90,000/- and for AY 2020-21 declaring income of Rs.3,40,460/-. Thereafter, due to Covid Pandemic, the assessee had closed down his business and the assessee started working as driver and had income from salary only. Notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued to the assessee for AY 2018-19 and the assessment was reopened. Since, the assessee was not aware of the proceedings as the assessee had never received any notice, the assessee could not participate in assessment proceedings. The AO in ex-parte proceedings completed the assessment making addition of entire credits in assessee’s bank account and thus made addition of Rs.58,63,630/-. Against the assessment order dated 16.03.2023 passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The assessee also filed an application for admission of additional evidences as the assessee could not place the relevant documents before the AO. The CIT(A) vide impugned order rejected assessee’s application for admission of additional evidences and passed the impugned order confirming the addition. The ld. Counsel submits that the assessee has been deprived of proper opportunity of making submissions, hence, in the interest of justice either the additional evidences filed by the assessee may be admitted or the matter be remanded back to the AO for considering the documents for proper adjudication of the matter.

Per contra, Shri Om Prakash representing the department vehemently supporting the impugned order submits that multiple opportunities were given to the assessee by the AO. However, the assessee failed to respond to any of the notices. However, no serious objection was raised by the ld. DR for remanding the matter back to the AO.

Both sides heard, orders of the authorities below examined. Considering entire facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to AO for denovo assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.

The AO shall consider all the relevant documents furnished by the assessee before completing the assessment.

The assessee shall respond to the notice(s) issued by the AO, without fail.

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.