NIMIT AGRAWAL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 622/RPR/2026Status: HeardITAT Raipur21 October 2026AY 2020-215 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee's primary contention was the violation of principles of natural justice due to the denial of cross-examination by the AO, and that this ground was not adjudicated by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order did not contain any adjudication on the ground that cross-examination should have been provided by the AO. Therefore, without delving into the merits of the additions, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) for both assessment years. The matters were remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication of the specific ground concerning the opportunity of cross-examination. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order in accordance with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Nimit Agrawal, filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for assessment years 2018-19 and 2020-21. The appeals challenged the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], Raipur. The assessee's counsel filed a petition for adjournment, citing engagement with statutory tax audit report filings. However, the Tribunal, referencing a Supreme Court decision, denied the adjournment and proceeded to hear the matter. The core of the assessee's grievance, as presented in the grounds of appeal, was that the Assessing Officer (AO) had violated principles of natural justice by denying the right to cross-examine a party whose statement, recorded under Section 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, formed the basis of additions made by the AO. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) had failed to adjudicate this crucial ground.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the additions by completely ignoring the violation of principles of natural justice by the AO, who denied the assessee the statutory right to cross-examine the party whose statement under Section 131 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was used as the sole foundation against the assessee, rendering the assessment and appellate orders void ab initio (as per Ground No. 2 in ITA No. 621/RPR/2026 and Ground No. 3 in ITA No. 622/RPR/2026)? 2. Whether the AO failed to provide a chance of cross-examination to the assessee regarding mobile WhatsApp messages, which is against the principles of natural justice (as per Ground No. 4 in Form 35 for both appeals)? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the AO violated principles of natural justice by denying the right to cross-examine the party whose statement was used against him. The assessee further contended that the CIT(A) failed to adjudicate this ground of appeal, leaving it unaddressed in the appellate order. The assessee relied on the principle that denial of cross-examination renders the assessment and appellate orders void ab initio. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue's contentions were not recorded in the judgment as the matter was heard on merits after the assessee's counsel did not appear.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 131,Section 250(4),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.10.2026Pronounced: 21.10.2026

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The captioned appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from the respective orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals), Raipur-3, dated 10.08.2026 for the assessment years 2018-19 & 2020-21 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

These matters had already been taken up for hearing earlier also and during that time, the Ld. Counsel for

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 131

All 4,706 judgments and leading authorities on Section 131 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →