What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Appeals) was obligated to examine the assessee's replies and pass a reasoned order. Since the CIT(Appeals) failed to consider the available reply, the order was cryptic and unsustainable.

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was based on the grievance that the CIT(Appeals) had passed an order without considering the written submissions filed by the assessee. The assessee contended that the CIT(Appeals) failed to deal with the contents of the reply filed.

Vardhman Enterprises, Harchand… vs DCIT | ITAT Chandigarh 2026

Q: What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) properly considered the submissions filed by the assessee before passing the appellate order.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate

For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

Hearing: 18.05.2026Pronounced: 19.05.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च�ीगढ़ �ायपीठ, च�ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH

BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1657/CHD/2025 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Vardhman Enterprises, The DCIT (Central)-1, Harchand Mili Road, Vs Chandigarh. Mandi Gobindgarh, Patiala. �ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAMFV9368G अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��थ�/Respondent

Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 18.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 19.05.2026

PHYSICAL HEARING

O R D E R PER LALIET KUMAR, JM

This is an appeal filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 Gurgaon [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 17.10.2025 passed for assessment year 2018-19.

ITA-1657/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 2

In this case, the grievance of the assessee before us is that the

ld.CIT (Appeals), despite filing the written submissions by the

assessee on 28.07.2025 before the ld.CIT (Appeals), has not

considered the submissions filed by the assessee. For the above

purposes, the ld. AR had drawn our attention to page 3 of the Paper

Book where the screen-shot of the submissions submitted by the

assessee before the ld.CIT (Appeals) are placed. The screen-shot

available at page 37 is as under :

ITA-1657/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 3

It was submitted by the ld. counsel for the assessee that the

impugned order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) had

been passed without considering the replies and supporting

submissions filed by the assessee during the course of appellate

proceedings. It was, therefore, contended that the impugned order

deserves to be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the

ld. CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication after due consideration of the

material placed on record.

Per contra, the ld. DR supported the order of the ld.

CIT(Appeals) and submitted that the replies filed by the assessee had

duly been considered and the appeal was decided in accordance with

law.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material

available on record. The ld. counsel for the assessee has referred to

various dates in paragraph 3 of the impugned order reflecting the

proceedings conducted before the ld. CIT(Appeals). However, despite

recording such dates, the ld. CIT(Appeals) observed that there was

no compliance on the part of the assessee and that no reply had been

ITA-1657/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 4

furnished thereafter. It is noticed that the assessee had filed a reply

dated 29.07.2025, which fact also finds mention in paragraph 3 of

the impugned order. However, notwithstanding the availability of the

said reply on record, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has neither adverted to nor

dealt with the contents thereof while adjudicating the appeal.

In our considered opinion, once the assessee had furnished

replies along with supporting material, it was incumbent upon the

ld. CIT(Appeals) to examine the same and pass a reasoned and

speaking order dealing with the submissions raised before him. In

the present case, despite the reply being available on record, the ld.

CIT(Appeals), for reasons best known to him, failed to consider the

same and proceeded to dispose of the issues in a cryptic, mechanical

and non-speaking manner, which cannot be sustained in the eyes of

law.

In view of the foregoing discussion, we deem it appropriate to

set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the

ld. CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication of the grounds raised by the

assessee, in accordance with law, after affording adequate

ITA-1657/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 5

opportunity of hearing to the assessee and after duly considering the

submissions and evidences placed on record.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced on 19.05.2026. Sd/- Sd/-

(MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (LALIET KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam” आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��थ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 3. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File 5.

Assistant Registrar

VARDHMAN ENTERPRISES ,HARCHAND MILI ROAD, GOBINDGARH, PUNJAB vs. DCIT (CEN)-1, CHD., C.R. BUILDING, CHANDIGARH

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments