PREM CHAND,JAINAGAR,SOLAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD PARWANOO, PARWANOO

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1070/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 April 2026AY 2015-162 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. It restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to plead and prove its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 82 days, claiming unawareness of the impugned order. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 84.33 Lacs under Section 69A, which was confirmed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's non-representation.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the assessee's non-representation before the lower authorities leading to an ex-parte addition. The Tribunal considered the principles of natural justice and the assessee's claim of unawareness.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144B,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 11-03-2025 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 144B r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 15-03-2023. The registry has noted delay of 82 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee on the strength of condonation petition which is accompanied by an affidavit of the assessee. It has been stated that the notices were sent on e-filing portal and the assessee was not aware of the impugned order. The Ld. AR has also prayed for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of unexplained money u/s 69A for Rs.84.33 Lacs which stood confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) for want of any representation from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the background of the assessee, we admit the appeal and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22nd April, 2026. (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 22-04-2026 आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant

2.

""थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड"फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →