MOHAR SINGH,KAITHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAITHAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1644/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 October 2026AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, considering the assessee's age and circumstances, and admitted the appeal for adjudication. The Tribunal, while considering the rival contentions and in light of the principles of natural justice, decided to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for a de novo assessment. The assessee was directed to ensure compliance before the AO. The Tribunal relied on the order of a Coordinate Chandigarh Bench in ITA No. 1673/Chd/2025 for AY 2012-13, which was the case of the assessee's brother, where the matter was also restored to the AO for a fresh assessment to grant another opportunity of hearing. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. No specific finding was given on the individual grounds of appeal as the matter was remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mohar Singh, filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, dated 13/02/2025, for Assessment Year 2012-13. The appeal challenges an assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which determined the assessee's income at Rs. 50,52,060/-. The primary dispute concerns an addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- made on account of an unexplained cash deposit in the assessee's bank account. The assessee claimed the deposit originated from the sale of agricultural land received in cash. The Assessing Officer (AO) made the addition after the assessee failed to furnish subsequent information and evidence sought. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The assessee filed an application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, citing the assessee's age (80 years) and unfamiliarity with e-filing, along with a personal accident of the advocate's son.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessment framed under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) is bad in law and void ab initio, as the notice issued under Section 148 was based on incorrect information (Assessee's contention). The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 2. Whether the assessment order is bad in law due to the absence of service of the mandatory notice under Section 143(2) (Assessee's contention). The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 3. Whether the addition made is bad in law and unsustainable for not invoking any particular charging or deeming provision of the Act (Assessee's contention). The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 4. Whether the addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- on account of cash deposit is unsustainable without corroborative material showing it represented unaccounted income (Assessee's contention). The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 5. Whether the addition is sustainable merely for non-production of certain parties, without any summons or inquiry being made (Assessee's contention). The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. Whether the assessment order is null and void for violating CBDT circular no. 19/2019 mandating DIN (Assessee's contention). The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 7. Whether the AO erred in charging interest under Section 234A and 234B (Assessee's contention). The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 234A,Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च�ीगढ़ �ायपीठ “बी” , च�ीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: VIRTUAL MODE �ी लिलत कुमार, �ाियक सद� एवं �ी िवजय वमा� , लेखा सद� BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. VIJAY VARMA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1644 /Chd/ 2025 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Mohar Singh बनाम The ITO S/o Shri Kartar Singh, Patti Ward-1 Kayastha Seth, Dhand Road, near Kaithal, Haryana Tagore School, Kaithal, Haryana- 136027 �ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: FHDPS2883C अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��थ�/Respondent िनधा�रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Pulkit Saini, Advocate राज� की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 30/09/2026 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 05/10/2026 आदेश/Order PER VIJAY VARMA, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 13/02/2025 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds:

1.

That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal against the impugned assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147, determining the income of assessee at Rs. 50,52,060/-. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the assessment u/s 147 is bad in law and void ab initio, as the notice issued u/s 148 is based on incorrect information. 3. That the impugned assessment order was bad in law in the absence of service of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. 4. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not appreciating that the addition has been made without citing or invoking any particular charging or deeming provision of the Act, rendering the addition bad in law and unsustainable.

5.

That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition of Rs. 50,00,000 on account of cash deposit in bank without bringing any corroborative material to show that it represented unaccounted income. 6. That the Ld. CIT (A) erred in sustaining the addition merely for non- production of certain parties, without appreciating that neither any summons nor any enquiry has been made. 7. That the assessment order is null and Void as the same is in violation of CBDT circular no.19/2019 mandating DIN. 8. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. A.O. has erred in law and on facts in charging interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

3.

The only issue involved in this appeal is an addition of Rs. 50,00,000/- made on account of cash deposit in bank account which was not explained by the assessee. The assessee claimed the cash deposit to be from sale of agriculture land received in cash. However, subsequent information and the evidences sought by the AO was not furnished which led to the addition of Rs. 50,00,000/-. The assessment was done consequent to a notice under section 148 issued by the AO.

4.

The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the said addition as required evidences was nor furnished even before the Ld. CIT(A).

5.

The Ld. AR referred to his contentions before the AO and also the request for condonation of delay in filing of appeal. As per Form No. 36 the date of service of order is mentioned as 04/11/2025 while the date of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is dt. 13/02/2025. The appellate order is passed by the NFAC which is communicated through electronic mode and there cannot be such a long delay in service of order. Apparently it is for this reason that an application for condonation of delay has been filed mentioning that the assessee is 80 years old and is not conversant with the internet or e-filing system and the assessee’s advocate’s son also met with an accident in April 2025. As per the said application the assessee came to know about the order of the Ld. CIT(A) only on 04/11/2025 when he inquired about the matter.

Apparently that cannot be a date of service of the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The condonation application is accompanied by an affidavit wherein the same facts have been stated.

6.

Considering the same and the totality of circumstances the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

7.

While the Ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities.

8.

The Ld. AR requested for remanding the matter back to the file of AO and assured the Tribunal for compliance by the assessee. The Ld. AR also relied on the order of the Coordinate Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal in ITA No. 1673/Chd/2025 for the A.Y. 2012-13 order dt. 02/07/2026 which is the case of the brother of the assessee and the matter has been restored to the file of the AO. The same is reproduced herein under:

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012- 13 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 08.09.2025 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 11.12.2019 wherein Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.50 Lacs for want of substantiating documents from the assessee. The Ld. CITA(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of any representation from assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The only prayer of Ld. AR is another opportunity of hearing before the lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. The Ld. AR stated that the assessee is in a position to substantiate the sources of cash deposit. 2. Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of Ld. AO for de- novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. 3. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purpose.

9.

We have considered the rival contentions and keeping in mind the principles of natural justice we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of AO for denovo assessment with directions to the assessee to ensure the compliance before the AO.

10.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 05/10/2026

Sd/- Sd/- लिलत कुमार िवजय वमा� (LALIET KUMAR) (VIJAY VARMA) �ाियक सद� /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��थ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु� (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�ीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File ANUPA Digitally signed by ANUPAMA MA GHERA BY ORDER, Date: 2026.10.22 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR GHERA INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 16:31:47 +05'30' KENDRIYA SADAN, SECTOR-9A CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →