GANPATI DEPARTMENTAL STORE,CIRCULAR ROAD, SOLAN vs. ITO, INCOME TAX OFFICE, SHIMLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 134/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 August 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment, with the assessee directed to plead and prove its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee firm was dissolved, and its former portals and emails were not monitored, leading to a delay in filing an appeal. The original assessment was framed ex-parte after reopening under Section 147 due to the dissolution.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal was justifiable and whether the ex-parte assessment and subsequent dismissal by the CIT(A) should be set aside for adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250,Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: VIRTUAL MODE BEFORE: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & SH. RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA, JM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 134/Chd/2026 �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Ganpati Departmental Store, बनाम ITO, Circular Road, Ward-1, Solan (HP) – 173212 Shimla �ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAFFG9954Q अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��थ�/Respondent िनधा�रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Parveen Sharma, Advocate – Ld. ARs राज� की ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Jaishree Sharma, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03.08.2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 10.08.2026 आदेश/Order PER RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA, J.M: The present appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dt. 6.9.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [CIT(A)] in the matter of an assessment framed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 14.03.2023. 2. At the outset, it was brought to our notice that there is a delay of 416 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. In the condonation petition, it has been stated that the appeal could not be

2 134/Chd/2026 filed in time since the assessee firm was dissolved and the portals and emails of the erstwhile firm was not monitored or perused during the relevant period. Considering the reasons adduced in the condonation petition and keeping in view the settled proposition that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed period. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

3.

Brief facts of the case are that no return of the income has been filed by the assessee for the assessment year under consideration on the ground that the assessee was a partnership concern which was dissolved with effect from 1.4.2010. Thereafter, the said concern was being run as a sole proprietorship business of Sh. Anurag Mittal. The case of the assessee for this year was re-opened under Section 147, read with section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide notice dated 31.3.2022. As the firm was dissolved, the assessee did not come to know about the issuance of the notice or the subsequent passing of the order under Section 147, read with Section 144 of the Act through which the income of the assessee firm was assessed at Rs.52,77,000/. Later, when assessee came to know about the passing of the said order, an appeal was preferred under Section 246A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the Ld. Commissioner of

3 134/Chd/2026 Income Tax Appeal but the assessee did not make any compliance to the notices issued and the same led to the dismissal of the appeal by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A). Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 4. The main grievance of the Assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the addition made by the Assessing Officer and reopening of the assessment was not sustainable in the eyes of law. The Ld. AR stated that the orders of lower authorities are ex- parte orders and the assessee has a good case on merits as well as on legal grounds. Accordingly, a prayer has been made to remand back the matter to lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. CIT- DR. 5. From case records, it is evident that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by simply upholding the addition made and sustaining order passed by the Assessing Officer. It is a well settled legal principle that matters should ordinarily be decided on merits. In the present case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the view that the issues raised by the assessee should be adjudicated on merits besides adjudication of legal grounds as raised by the assessee.

6.

From the order of the Ld. CIT(A), it is clear that opportunity by issuing show cause notice was given to be Assessee but the Assessee

4 134/Chd/2026 did not comply with the same. The assessee neither filed the required details nor furnished any documents as sought by the Department. In the interest of substantial justice, we set aside the impugned order and direct Ld. AO framed de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The same would be at a cost of Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only) which would be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order to ‘Poor Patient Welfare Fund’ maintained by PGIMER, Chandigarh. The proof of the same would be furnished to Ld. AO who would proceed accordingly.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 10.08.2026. -Sd- -Sd- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL ) (RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER rkk आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��थ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →