SANGEETA SHARMA,GURUGRAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3819/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2026AY 2021-223 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the additional evidence was vital and the assessee was ex-parte, the ends of justice require restoring the issues to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee sought a stay for a demand for AY 2021-22. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without admitting additional evidence filed under Rule 46A, despite the assessee being ex-parte before the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without admitting additional evidence filed under Rule 46A, especially when the assessee was ex-parte before the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 08.05.2026Pronounced: 08.05.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

The application for stay was listed today and on hearing both sides it

was found that the assessee had sought stay for demand of AY; 2021-22,

however, assessee while challenging the impugned order of ld. CIT(A) has

raised legal grounds as well and without admitting the evidence filed under

Rule 46A, ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal.

2.

The Bench is of the considered view that as assessee is an individual

and additional evidences were vital for determination of the issue, the ends of

justice would need to restore the issues on merits as well as law, to the files

of ld. CIT(A).

3.

The appeal of the assessee was also taken up for hearing. The issue

involved is the addition which was made in the hands of the assessee in an

ex-parte assessment order wherein disallowance u/s 54 was made and

addition u/s 69 has been made.

4.

Ld. DR agreed to the proposition that given the nature of issues

involved and as assessee was ex-parte before assessing officer, additional

P a g e | 3 SA No.233/Del/2026 ITA No.3819/Del/2026 Sangeeta Sharma (AY: 2021-22) evidences deserves to be admitted, thereupon ld. CIT(A) should have passed

the order.

5.

In the light of aforesaid we allow the appeal of the assessee for

statistical purposes and restore the issue on merits to the files of ld. CIT(A) to

allow additional evidences of the assessee and thereafter to consider the issue

on law and on merits and pass order afresh. Consequently, stay application

filed become infructuous and dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Anubhav Sharma) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 13.05.2026 Rohit, Sr. PS

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →