SHRI VINAL CHOGGA,RAJOURI vs. INCOME TAX O0FFICER WARD-1, JAMMU

ITA 657/ASR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 September 2026AY 2015-164 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's reasons for non-compliance acceptable. For the assessment proceedings, the Tribunal was convinced that the prevailing COVID-19 situation contributed to the non-compliance. Regarding the first appellate proceedings, the explanation that notices were sent to the accountant's email and overlooked was also deemed acceptable. The Tribunal held that, for whatever reason, the assessee did not get an opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer and the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, the assessee deserved an opportunity to represent their case. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders of the learned First Appellate Authority and restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication, with a direction to provide the assessee with due and reasonable opportunity of being heard. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Vinal Chogga, filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The core grievance was that ex-parte orders were passed by the First Appellate Authority, upholding additions made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee's counsel explained that non-participation during assessment proceedings was due to the difficulties posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. For the first appellate proceedings, the non-appearance was attributed to hearing notices being overlooked by the assessee's accountant who received them via email. The revenue relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the First Appellate Authority.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the First Appellate Authority for Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 are sustainable, considering the assessee's reasons for non-participation? Assessee's contentions: - Non-participation during assessment proceedings was due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, making compliance difficult. - Non-appearance before the First Appellate Authority occurred because hearing notices were sent to the accountant's email and were overlooked. - The assessee requests that the issues be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication to allow an opportunity to represent the case. Revenue's contentions: - The revenue relied upon the observations made by the Assessing Officer and the learned First Appellate Authority.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Joginder Singh, CA

For Respondent: Shri Prashant Singh, Sr. DR

PER: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, V.P.:

Present appeals by the assessee arise out of separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16. 2. The basic grievance of the assessee is against ex-parte orders passed by the First Appellate Authority, confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

2 ITA No. 656 -657/Asr/2025 Asst. Year: 2014-15 & 2015-16

Before us, learned counsel appearing for the assessee fairly submitted that due to non-participation of the assessee both in course of assessment proceedings as also the first appellate authori

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 account Sign 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →