BACHAN SINGH,PUNJAB, INDIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (NWR-W-93-41), MOHALI

ITA 366/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh24 August 2026AY 2012-135 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay subject to a cost of planting 300 trees. However, due to lack of proper examination of facts and evidence by the lower authorities, the matter was restored to the AO for a fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order confirming additions made by the AO for cash deposited in bank accounts. The appeal was filed beyond the limitation period, and the assessee had also failed to comply with notices from the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the additions made by the AO were justified without proper examination of the assessee's evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ “ए” , च"ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE "ी लिलत कुमार, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी िवजय वमा" , लेखा सद" BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. VIJAY VARMA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 366/Chd/ 2026 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Bachan Singh बनाम The ITO Village Papri, Manauli, Rupnagar (NWR-W-93-41) Manauli S.O. Punjab- 140306 "ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: CJCPS4709R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""थ"/Respondent िनधा"रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ankur Bansal, C.A राज" की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17/08/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 24/08/2026

आदेश/Order PER VIJAY VARMA, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the Appellant against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 27/08/2025 for the Assessment Year 2012-13 in appeal No. CIT(A), Chandigarh-2/10986/2019-20. 2. During the course of hearing the Registry has pointed out that the present appeal is barred by limitation by 111 days.

3.

The appellant has filed an Affidavit mentioned that the assessee being an agriculturist was not aware of the legal provisions or the e-pr

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →