GAURAV SISSODIA,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AMBALA, AMBALA

ITA 730/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 October 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 511 days in filing the appeal, being satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed limitation period. The Tribunal accepted the prayer of the assessee's AR to remand the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Gaurav Sisodia, is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC (CIT(A)) dated 31.07.2024. The assessment year in question is 2017-18. The original assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer (AO) on best judgment basis under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 06.12.2019. The AO made an addition of Rs. 1,47,28,138/- on account of bank credits. The assessee did not attend the assessment proceedings. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's assessment. The assessee filed the present appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 511 days, for which condonation was sought.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 511 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT is liable to be condoned? (Question of procedure) Assessee's Contention: The delay was neither intentional nor deliberate and occurred due to unavoidable circumstances. The assessee relied on a condonation petition and an affidavit. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Sr. DR) opposed the condonation of delay. 2. Whether the matter should be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits? (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness) Assessee's Contention: The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) prayed for the matter to be remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. Sr. DR opposed the prayer for remand.

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, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

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

Pronounced: 01.10.2026

RAJESH DAMODARLAL SHARMA (Judicial Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AYs) 2017- 18 arises out of order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 31.07.2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) on best judgment basis u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 06.12.2019. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of bank credits for Rs.1,47,28,138/-. The assessee did not AY-2017-18 attend assessment proceedings. The Ld. CIT(

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 →