MR. VIKRAMJIT TANGRI & SONS (HUF),LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD III(1), JCIT-III, LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 267/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 July 2026AY 2017-182 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, admitted the appeal and restored it to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to present and prove its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was delayed by 265 days. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 187.13 Lacs under Section 69. The CIT(A) had confirmed the assessment due to the assessee's non-representation.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be admitted despite a significant delay and non-appearance of the assessee, and whether the case should be remanded for fresh consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 143(3)

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 HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.267/CHANDI/2025 (िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sh. Vikramjit Tangri & Sons HUF ITO Ward I3(1) Bahadur Ke Road Aaykar Bhawan बनाम/ Vs. Dyeing Complex, Ludhiana -141001 Ludhiana �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAFHV-2905-L (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ� / Respondent) : अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR (Virtual) 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) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 11.03.2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) of the Act on 30.12.2019. The registry has noted delay of 265 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee on the

strength of condonation petition. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition u/s 69 for Rs.187.13 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for want of any representation from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 2. Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we admit the appeal and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee 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 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →