NEW AGE KNOWLEDGE SOLUTIONS LIMITED,MUMBAI V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), MUMBAI

ITA 5851/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves New Age Knowledge Solutions Limited appealing against an ex-parte order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which upheld additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding unexplained credit under section 68 amounting to Rs. 10.57 Crore for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The appeal was initially delayed due to administrative oversights, including the inoperative email of a former employee, leading to the non-receipt of the CIT(A)'s order. The Tribunal found no intentional delay in filing the appeal and, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to restore the matter to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 835800 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 23-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BISWANATH DAS
• Assessee Lawyers: BHUPENDRA SHAH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 5851/MUM/2025 (AY: 2010-11) (Physical hearing) New Age Knowledge Solutions Limited 804, Hallmark Business Plaza, Sant Dyaneshwar Marg, Near Gurunanak Hospital, Bandra East, Mumbai – 400081. [PAN : AACCN9737A] Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Bhupendra Shah, CA Revenue by Shri Biswanath Das, CIT-DR Date of Institution 23.09.2025 Date of hearing 07.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 12.02.2026 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the ex-parte order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 20.06.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11, wherein addition on account of unexplained credit under section 68 of Rs. 10.57 Crore and other additions made by Assessing officer (AO) was upheld. 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The ld. Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that there is delay of 23 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed its affidavit for condonation of delay. The ld. AR submits that the assessee could not realized about passing of order by ld. CIT(A). The e-mail address of assessee was assessable by Printed from counselvise.com ITA 5851/Mum/2025 (AY 2010-11) New Age Knowledge Solutions Limited 2 former employee, who left the services issued to cessation of work and it become inoperative. In absence of proper staff, the assessee company could not realized about passing of the order and on coming to know the present appeal is filed. The delay in filing is not intentional. On merit, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that while filing appeal before ld. CIT(A), in Form 35, the assessee in column related to service of notice through e-mail opted as “No”. The notice through e-mail was not realized by assessee as there was no staff in the office of Assessee Company. Therefore, no compliance could be made before ld. CIT(A). Resultantly, ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that one more opportunity may be allowed to assessee to contest the appeal on merit. He undertakes on behalf of the assessee to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. 3. On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue not seriously opposed the plea of ld. AR of the assessee for condoning the delay or in seeking restoration of matter to the file of ld. CIT(A). 4. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the lower authorities carefully. Firstly, we are considering the plea in condonation of delay raised by ld. AR of the assessee. Considering the fact that there is minor delay in 23 days in filing the appeal. On considering the explanation offered by ld. AR of the assessee. We find that there is no intentional or deliberate delay in Printed from counselvise.com ITA 5851/Mum/2025 (AY 2010-11) New Age Knowledge Solutions Limited 3 filing appeal. Thus, delay in filing appeal before Tribunal is condoned. Now, adverting to merits of the case. 5. We find that ld. CIT(A) passed the order in ex-parte proceedings by taking view that despite service of various notice under section 250, the assessee has not furnished written submission. Considering the fact that assessee has opted “No” in Form 35 and ultimately ex-parte order was passed by ld CIT(A). No physical notice was served. We find that substantial rights of assessee are in the present appeal. Further, before us, the ld. AR of the assessee has undertaken to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. Therefore, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide all the issues on merit. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 12/02/2026 Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 12/02/2026 Biswajit,Sr PS Printed from counselvise.com ITA 5851/Mum/2025 (AY 2010-11) New Age Knowledge Solutions Limited 4 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "