RANJAY KUMAR SHARMA,VIKAS NAGAR NEAR ISM vs. ITO WARD W2(1), RANCHI, RANCHI

ITA 169/RAN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi14 August 2026AY 2016-1716 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits, especially when the AO did not provide crucial documents and reopened the case on one reason while making additions on another. The reassessment order was passed ex-parte and arbitrarily.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened assessment for AY 2014-15 based on the purchase of a car worth ₹45,41,470. However, the reassessment order made an addition of ₹91,56,000 for the purchase of immovable property, citing non-existent reasons. The assessee did not receive necessary documents for filing objections.

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment proceedings were vitiated due to non-supply of reasons and approvals to the assessee, and whether the addition made was on non-existent reasons. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without considering the merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 69B,Section 143(2),Section 119,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY & SMT. RAJANI GUDURI

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Choudhary, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Ram Chandra Marndi, Sr.DR
Hearing: 04/08/2026Pronounced: 14/08/2026

PER: RAJANI GUDURI, J.M.

1.

This appeal is filed by the appellant/assessee aggrieved by the confirmation order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2015-16/10146140 dated 18/07/2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act), in ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1042194964(1) dated 30/03/2022 passed under Section 147 r.w.s 144, 144B of the Act, passed by the ld. Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi for the A.Y. 2016-17. 2. As per the contention of the appellant, the facts of the case are, that the appellant is a retail trader and he does not file his regular return of income since his i

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →