HARUN MOHAMMAD,HARDOI vs. ITO-3(2), HARDOI, HARDOI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 330/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 March 2026AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) had not given a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The Tribunal, in agreement with both parties, set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to the AO for a de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of Rs. 3,27,240/- made by the AO. The AO had completed assessment and made an addition of Rs. 3,27,240/- as undisclosed income.

What were the issues?

Whether the appellate authorities provided a reasonable opportunity to the assessee before passing ex-parte orders and confirming additions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 69,Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Parnav Pandey, Advocate

O R D E R (A) This appeal vide 2016-17 against impugned appellate order dated 24.04.2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1052300183(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. The grounds of appeal

of the assessee are as under: -

1.

1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the Ld. AO erred on facts and in law in passing ex-parte order which is in violation of the principles of natural justice and be set-a-side.

2. That the CIT(Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.3,27,240/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case.

3.

The appellant reserves a right to add/alter/amend/any ground of appeal at the time of its hearing.” (B) In this case, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings and passed assessment dated 23.01.2025 whereby he determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.5,89,440/-, by making addition of Rs.3,27,240/- as undisclosed income u/s 69 of the Act. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by Assessment Year:2016-17 2 the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 24.04.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A). The present appeal has been filed by the assessee in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 24.04.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A).

(B.1) In the course of appellate proceedings in ITAT, the assessee filed a paper book containing the following particulars: - PARTICULARS S. No 1 Copy of Notice issued u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 2 Copy of Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi ITAT in the case of Anita Garg vs ITO-2(3)(4), Bulandsahar 3 Copy of Bank statement 4 Copy of Agreement of Agriculture land along with copy of Agriculture Land Ownership Proof. (C) Both sides have been heard. Materials on record have been perused. At the time of hearing, learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT(A) have not given reasonable opportunity to the assessee; and without giving due consideration to the materials brought for their consideration. He further submitted that the issues in dispute should be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass de novo order. The Ld. Departmental Representative expressed no objection to this. In view of the foregoing, in the specific facts and circumstances of this case; and as representatives of both sides are in agreement with this; the impugned appellate order of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside, and the issue in dispute is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid directions.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 12/03/2026)

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →