SANGEETA BHALLA,HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD 4(1), GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9060/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 July 2026AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee did not adequately present facts before the lower authorities. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the quantum and penalty matters were remanded to the AO for fresh assessment and adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to substantially comply with the opportunities provided by the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). This led to ex parte orders in the quantum appeal and two penalty appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions and penalties made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) are sustainable when the assessee failed to present adequate facts. Whether the penalties are to be considered in light of Section 273B.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271(1)(b),Section 271F,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Respondent: Shri Balkrishan Gopal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 08.07.2026

ITA Nos.9060 to 9062/DEL/2025 SANGEETA BHALLA IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.9060 to 9062/DEL/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 SANGEETA BHALLA, Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, H.No. F 5/2, DLF Phase-1, 1st Floor, Income Tax Office, Gurgaon 122001, Haryana. Ward 4(1), Gurgaon, PAN No. AKGPB9272K Haryana. Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Balkrishan Gopal, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 08.07.2026 Pronouncement on 17.07.2026 O R D E R PER BENCH: 1. This is a batch of three appeals pertaining to the same assessee, which for the sake of convenience are being disposed of through a single order. It is seen that the main appeal is ITA No.9061/Del/2025 pertaining to the quantum matter, whereas remaining two appeals pertain to penalties for the same year as in the quantum appeal.

1.1 The quantum matter arises from order dated 02.12.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by NFAC.

1.2 On the last date of hearing, none attended on behalf of the assessee but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of Ld. DR. 1

ITA Nos.9060 to 9062/DEL/2025 SANGEETA BHALLA 2. The Ld. DR took us through the impugned orders in the three appeals under consideration and read out extensively from then Ld. AO’s and Ld. CIT(A)’s orders. It was highlighted by the Ld. DR that the assessee did not comply substantially before the Ld. AO as the opportunities provided, as mentioned on pages 2 & 3 of the Ld. AO’s order, were not availed by the assessee. It was further mentioned by the Ld. DR that even before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee did not file sufficient details to enable the Ld. CIT(A) to form a fair opinion about the impugned additions. In this regard, the second paragraph on page 21 of the impugned order was especially pointed out by the Ld. DR and the Ld. DR thereafter relied on the orders of the authorities below.

3.

We have considered the submissions of Ld. DR and we have also gone through the documents before us. It is seen that the assessee has suffered the impugned additions on account of the fact that adequate presentation of facts was not made before either of the authorities below. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to remand the quantum matter after setting aside the impugned order. Since even before the Ld. AO there was an ex parte order, hence, this matter is remitted to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment.

4.

Regarding the two penalties levied u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act and Section 271F of the Act, we find that even these penalties have been disposed of in an ex parte manner. Accordingly, even these matters are

ITA Nos.9060 to 9062/DEL/2025 SANGEETA BHALLA being remitted back to the file of Ld. AO, after setting aside the impugned orders in these two cases. The Ld. AO would give an opportunity of being heard and the assessee would avail of the same for making a presentation of facts. We may remind the Ld. AO that these penalties are also to be looked at from the lens of Section 273B of the Act.

5.

In the result, these three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 17.07.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 271(1)(b)

All 2,912 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →