IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.612/PUN/2024 नधा रण वष /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Mindspace Ventures Limited, Plot No.4, Jay Nagar, Dashmeshnagar, Aurangabad 431 005 Maharashtra PAN : AAGCM3686H Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 15.01.2024 for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a company which did not file any Return of Income for the A.Y. 2016-17 under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. On verification of the information available with the Department, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the assessee made huge transactions through SBI credit cards and paid credit card bills of Assessee by : Adjournment application rejected Revenue by : Shri Sandeep P. Sathe Date of hearing : 25.06.2024 Date of pronouncement : 25.06.2024 ITA No.612/PUN/2024 2 Rs.2,16,36,994/- and also received interest from bank of Rs.2,09,295/-. The case was reopened by way of issue of notice u/s.148 after recording the reasons. The assessee neither responded to notice u/s.148 nor u/s.142(1) of the Act. In the circumstances, the AO vide order dated 29.05.2023 was constrained to complete the assessment u/s.144 r.w.s147 of the Act, bringing to tax the unexplained expenditure as well as the interest income aggregating to Rs.2,18,46,289/-. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC who vide impugned order dated 15.01.2024 dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. We have carefully perused the relevant material on record. It is an admitted fact that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act. We find the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC also without discussing anything on merits of the controversy of the additions made on account of unexplained expenditure as well as interest income, simply dismissed the appeal in limine, which is contrary to settled position of law. It is a trite law that the CIT(A) should have dealt with the merits of the issues in appeal, even in the case of an ex-parte order. In this regard, reference is being made to a decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. ITA No.612/PUN/2024 3 Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for de novo disposal of the issues in accordance with law. We order accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on this 25 th day of June, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 25 th June, 2024 Satish आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT concerned 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune