SUMAN RANI, ,KARNAL vs. JAO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3 , PANCHKULA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1760/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 July 2026AY 2016-20172 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal accepted the assessee's request for another hearing before the lower authorities, subject to a cost of Rs. 3,000/-. The CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate the appeal de novo on merits without considering the delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a 62-day delay. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 70 Lacs in the assessment order for lack of substantive representation from the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be admitted despite a delay, and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case before the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH VIRTUAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.1760/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Suman Rani ITO Ward 3 W/o Matu Ram Panchkula - 134112 बनाम/ Vs. H.No.89, Gali No.2, Gandhi Nagar Karnal – 132001 �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BBNPR-7265-P (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. AR ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 01-07-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 06-07-2026 : आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2016- 17arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 01.12.2025in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 08.02.2024. The Ld. AR, at the outset, pleaded for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities on the ground

that the assessee is in a position to defend its case. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. In the assessment order, Ld. AO madeaddition of cash deposit for Rs.70 Lacs for want of any substantive representation from the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal for want of condonation of delay of 62 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 2. Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we accept the prayer of Ld. AR subject to payment of cost of Rs.3,000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order to the Poor Patient Relief Fund of PGI Hospital, Chandigarh. The proof of the same would be furnished by the assessee to Ld. CIT(A) who would proceed for de novo adjudication of the appeal on merits without raising the issue of delay. The assessee is directed to plead and prove its case forthwith. 3. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 06th July, 2026 -Sd- -Sd- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AS Dated: 06-07-2026 आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →