CHAMBAL TRADINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), GWALIOR

ITA 314/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra01 October 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had been afforded six opportunities by the first appellate authority but failed to respond, leading to an ex-parte order by the CIT(A). While acknowledging the non-cooperative conduct of the assessee, the Tribunal, in the interest of justice, decided to restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee was directed to be diligent and cooperative in future hearings. The CIT(A) was instructed to ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal was deemed liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. No specific finding was given on the merits of the addition of Rs. 1,05,000/-.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Chambal Tradings Pvt. Ltd., is in appeal against the order dated 27.01.2026 passed by the CIT(A) (NFAC), Delhi. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte, upholding an addition of Rs. 1,05,000/- to the assessee's income. This addition was made by the DCIT under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide an assessment order dated 17.03.2025 passed under Sections 147 and 144B of the Act for the Assessment Year 2019-2020. The assessee filed the present appeal before the ITAT with a delay of approximately 7 days, which was condoned. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT, while the Revenue was represented.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,05,000/- made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the appeal was dismissed ex-parte. Assessee's contentions: The assessee did not present any arguments before the ITAT as they did not appear. The grounds of appeal included that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the impugned addition. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue was represented by the Sr. DR. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (SMC

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 30.09.2026Pronounced: 30.09.2026

PER: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, J.M.

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 27.01.2026 passed in appeal No NFAC/2018-19/10475777 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/ (NFAC) Delhi [(hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2019-20, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte, confirming the addition of Rs. 1,05,000/- made in the income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act, vide assessment order dated 17.03.2025 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act.

2.

At the very outset, according to registry’s report, the appellant filed this appeal on 09.04.2026 by a delay of about 7 days. Considering the short

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 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →