HARSHINDER SINGH, ,ASANSOL vs. ITO, WARD 2(3), DURGAPUR,, DURGAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1698/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 July 2026AY 2014-20154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the orders of both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) were ex-parte, with no participation from the assessee. The CIT(A) also failed to decide all grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s dismissal order for AY 2014-15 was heard. The assessee contended that both lower authorities failed to provide an opportunity to be heard and the CIT(A) did not decide all grounds of appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities provided adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decided all grounds of appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri Arbind Agarwal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sandip Mandal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 27.07.2026Pronounced: 29.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1698/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2014-15

Harshinder Singh Vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Durgapur Opposite Maharanisthan mandier, S.P. Mukherjee Road, Bye Lane-3, Murgasol, Asansol, Paschim Bardhaman, West Bengal-713301 [PAN: AJUPS8630F] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Arbind Agarwal, AR Respondent by : Shri Sandip Mandal, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 27.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 29.07.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 31.03.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act on 30.12.2019 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 30.12.2019, Assessee preferred Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld.

ITA No.1698/Kol/2026 Harshinder Singh; A.Y: 2014-15 CIT(A) vide Order dated 31.03.2026, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 31.03.2026, Assessee filed the present Appeal.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, in the case of the co-owner, Shri Bijay Kumar Khunda, who has been similarly placed who has jointly executed the Joint Development Agreement with M/s Ankur Nirman Private Limited, the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition made on account of Long-Term Capital Gain for Assessment Year 2014–15. The Learned Counsel further submitted that both the Authorities below have not provided opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the Grounds of Appeal, thus sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not made proper compliance before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law, which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not

ITA No.1698/Kol/2026 Harshinder Singh; A.Y: 2014-15 participated in any of the proceedings. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. It is the contention of the Assessee that, in similarly placed co-owner's case, the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Long-Term Capital Gain. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de-novo consideration of the issue. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.

6.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 29.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.07.2026 DP, PS

ITA No.1698/Kol/2026 Harshinder Singh; A.Y: 2014-15 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 147

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →