"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “सी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी राक ेश ͧमĮ, लेखा सटèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member &Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member] I.T.A. No. 495/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nitesh Kumar (PAN: ALLPK 9936 B) Vs. ACIT, Ward-3(1), Malda Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 09.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 16.06.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri S Jhajharia, AR For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Praveen Kishore, CITDR ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 21.10.2024 for AY 2017-18. 2 I.T.A. No. 495/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nitesh Kumar 2. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 66 days for this assessee has filed condonation petition, which are as follows- 3 I.T.A. No. 495/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nitesh Kumar 4 I.T.A. No. 495/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nitesh Kumar On perusal of the condonation petition, the reason for delay in filing the appeal seems to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncement that the case should be decided on merit not on technical issue, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee being an individual is engaged in the wholesale business. The return of income was filed on 24.03.2018 admitting a total income of Rs. 19,42,880/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 06.05.2018. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 09.08.2018. Notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 01.07.2019 calling for certain information but there was no response. Even several reminder letters were issued. A show cause letter was also issued on 11.11.2019 but still there was no response accordingly, the assessment was completed and the total income is computed as under: Income from business on estimate (as discussed ) Rs. 39,52,413/- Add. Income from agro input import export zone firm & Income from other sources Rs. 3,03,424/- Unexplained money u/s 69A (as discussed) Rs. 1,16,15,600/- Gross total income Rs. 1,58,71,437/- Less: Deduction u/s 80TTA Rs. 4,947/- Total income Rs. 1,58,66,437/- 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed as there was non- compliance on behalf of the assessee. 5 I.T.A. No. 495/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nitesh Kumar Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 5. The Ld. A.R in stead of arguing into the merit of the case has only prayed that the assessee has to give an opportunity to place its case before the AO as the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) are an ex-parte order. The AR submits that the appeal should be restored into the file of AO instead of Ld. CIT(A) as AO is the competent person to verify the documents. The Ld. A.R in course of argument undertakes that the assessee will co-operate in the proceedings. 6. Contrary to that the Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in remitting the appeal of the assessee back to the file of A.O. 7. Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties, we have perused the order of AO as well as Ld. CIT(A), and there is no dispute that the order passed by the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) are an ex-parte order when there was no response from the side of assessee. The prayer of the assessee is only to this effect that the assessee has to give an opportunity to place its case before the AO. Interest of justice demands to give an opportunity to assessee to place his case before the AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the AO confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) and the appeal of the assessee is remitted back to the file of AO for fresh adjudication. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 16th June , 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mishra /राक ेश ͧमĮ) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 16th June, 2025 SM, Sr. PS 6 I.T.A. No. 495/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Nitesh Kumar Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Nitesh Kumar, C/O, M/s Salarpuria jajodia & Co., 7, C.R Avenue, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700072 2. Respondent – ACIT, Ward-3(1), Malda 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "