MOHD. SALMAN,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -4(1), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 202/LKW/2026Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 May 2026AY 2020-213 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues in dispute back to the Assessing Officer for a denovo assessment. This was to be done after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee argued that both the assessment and appellate orders were passed without a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment and appellate orders were passed in violation of natural justice and whether GST late fees and sundry trade creditors were correctly treated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144,Section 37(1),Section 68,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, CA

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.

(A) This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide orders dated 15.01.2026 for the AY 2020-21. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1.

Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order dated 15.01.2026 of the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law, erroneous on facts, and passed in violation of the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 and principles of natural justice, inasmuch as the assessment was completed without granting effective opportunity of being heard and by prematurely closing the e- submission window despite the appellant's adjournment request.

I.T.A. No. 202/Lkw/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 2

2.

Because, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 1,39,654/- on account of GST late fee by erroneously treating the same as penal in nature and disallowable under section 37(1), without appreciating that the expenditure was incurred in the course of business for statutory compliance and does not arise from any offence or prohibited activity. 3. Because, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in misapplying and distinguishing judicial precedents while rejecting the appellant's claim of deduction of GST late fee, and in relying upon inapplicable case laws, thereby vitiating the finding on allowability of the said expenditure. 4. Because, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,16,347/- under section 68 in respect of sundry trade creditors and in taxing the same under section 115BBE, without appreciating that the balances arose out of regular business transactions and that the appellant had discharged the primary onus regarding identity, genuineness and creditworthiness. 5. Because on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) has been passed in absolute violation of the principles of Natural Justice, without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and therefore deserves to be declared a nullity.

(B) In this case, assessment order dated 06.09.2022 was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) wherein the assessee’s income was determined at Rs. 23,11,511/. The assessee’s appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the Learned CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 15.01.2026. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 15.01.2026.

(C) At the time of hearing, the Learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the impugned appellate order and the assessment order were passed without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He submitted that the issues in dispute regarding additions made in the

I.T.A. No. 202/Lkw/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 3

assessment order should be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass denovo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The Learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to this. In view of the foregoing, after hearing both sides and after due consideration, materials on record; the issues in dispute regarding additions made in the assessment order are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pas denovo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(D) All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed off, in accordance with the aforesaid directions. For statistical purposes, the appeals are partly allowed.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on 07/05/2026)

Sd/- (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Date: 07/05/2026 SK, Sr.PS

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A)

Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Lucknow

More judgments on Section 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →