Shri Vikas Yadav vs Ward-4(1), Gurgaon

Per Mahavir Singh, Vice President:

These appeals by the assessee are directed against the order of learned CIT(Appeals), NFAC, Delhi dated 19^th September, 2025. Assessment in this case was made by the Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi vide order dated 30^th March, 2022 passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 and Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the assessment year 2013-14 and 2014-15.

At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee stated that the order of learned CIT(A) is ex-parte and there is no adjudication on merits of addition made of ₹1,43,71,471/- on account of cash deposit in bank account for the assessment year 2013-14 and an amount of ₹2,42,63,000/- on account of cash deposit again in bank account for the assessment year 2014-15. Learned Counsel for the assessee stated that neither the jurisdiction issue for reopening nor the issue on merits is examined by the learned CIT(A) and he has not gone into the merits of these two issues. The learned CIT(A) has passed a non-speaking order and that also ex-parte.

We noted from a perusal of the orders of learned CIT(A) for both the years that learned CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issues of reopening as well as the issue on merits being cash deposits in both the years for the reason that the assessee has not represented despite issuance of various notices. However, in the interest of natural justice, we are providing one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case before the learned CIT(A) by filing the necessary documentary evidence to prove his case on reopening as well as on the issue of addition on merits of cash deposits in both the years. In terms of the above, the orders of learned CIT(A) in both the years are set aside and appeals restored to his file for fresh adjudication.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.