MANJEET SINGH,CANADA vs. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 1423/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 October 2026AY 2019-204 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal accepted the prayer of the Ld. AR, citing the principle of natural justice. The impugned order of the CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 was set aside, and the matter was restored back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee was directed to plead and prove its case forthwith. The Tribunal noted that no other grounds were urged in the appeal. For AY 2019-20, the facts were identical, and therefore, this appeal was also restored back to the Ld. CIT(A) on similar lines. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal did not decide the substantive merits of the assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Manjeet Singh, filed appeals for Assessment Years (AY) 2015-16 and 2019-20. The appeal for AY 2015-16 challenged an order dated 31.03.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], Delhi-43. This order confirmed an assessment framed by the Assessing Officer (AO) on a best judgment basis under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 22.04.2024. The AO assessed the assessee's income at Rs. 475.25 Lacs due to the assessee's non-representation. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal, stating that the Form No. 35, grounds of appeal, and statements of facts were not received. The assessee's authorized representative (AR) presented these documents to the Tribunal and requested the matter be restored to the CIT(A). The revenue's senior Departmental Representative (DR) opposed this.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeals should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, considering the assessee's submission of documents and the principle of natural justice, despite the CIT(A)'s prior dismissal for non-receipt of required filings. Assessee's contention: The Ld. AR argued that the necessary documents (Form No. 35, grounds of appeal, and statements of facts) were indeed filed but not received by the Ld. CIT(A). The AR placed these documents on record before the Tribunal and prayed for the matter to be restored to the Ld. CIT(A) for a decision on the merits, invoking the principle of natural justice. Revenue's contention: The Ld. Sr. DR opposed the prayer of the Ld. AR for restoring the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A). No specific legal provisions or precedents were cited by the revenue in opposition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA, JM

Pronounced: 01.10.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.1422/CHANDI/2026
ITA Nos.1423/CHANDI/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA (Judicial Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2015- 16 and 2019-20 have identical facts. The appeal for AY 2015-16 arises out of an order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi-43 ITA Nos. 1422 & 1423/Chandi/2026 AY-2015-16 & 2019-20 [CIT(A)] dated 31.03.2026 confirming an assessment as framed by Ld. AO on best judgment basis u/

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 →