NAVEEN BANSAL,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 1, SIRSA, SIRSA

ITA 794/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 September 2026AY 2019-204 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay of 120 days in filing the appeal, finding that the delay was explained by the assessee and the Revenue did not seriously oppose it. On the merits, the Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee had failed to participate before the AO and the CIT(A), leading the lower authorities to proceed ex-parte and make additions. However, the ITAT also recognized that assessment proceedings aim to determine correct tax liability. Since the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the issue on merit but dismissed the appeal due to non-participation, the Tribunal decided to give the assessee one more opportunity. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remanded the matter back to the file of the AO. This was made subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited in the PGI Poor Relief Fund. The AO was directed to examine all evidence and legal contentions raised by the assessee and decide the issue afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The AO was also given liberty to decide the matter based on available material if the assessee failed to cooperate. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Naveen Bansal, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, dated 10.09.2025, for Assessment Year 2019-20. The Revenue was represented by Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR. The appeal was filed with a delay of 120 days, for which the assessee filed an application for condonation. The assessee's primary contention before the ITAT was that they were ex-parte before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A), and therefore, the matter should be remanded back to the lower authorities. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal based on non-participation.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 120 days in filing the appeal by the assessee should be condoned? (Question of procedure) 2. Whether the order of the lower authorities should be set aside and the matter remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication on merits? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contentions: - The assessee argued that they were ex-parte before the AO and the CIT(A), necessitating a remand to the lower authorities. Revenue's Contentions: - The Revenue initially submitted that there was a delay of 120 days in filing the appeal and requested condonation. The ld. DR did not seriously oppose the condonation of delay application. The Revenue did not present any specific arguments on the merits of the case or against the remand.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI VIJAY VARMA

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goel, CA
For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Hearing: 28.09.2026Pronounced: 29.09.2026

PER LALIET KUMAR, JM

This is an appeal filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 10.09.2025 passed for assessment year 2019-20 on the grounds mentioned in the Memo of Appeals.

2.

At the outset, ld. DR submitted that there is a delay of 120 days in filing the appeal for the reasons mentioned in the ITA 794/CHD/2026 A.Y. 2019-20 2 application for condonation of delay. It was submitted that delay in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned. The ld. DR has not seriously opposed the condonati

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →