GURMEET SINGH,AMBALA CITY vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE , KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6708/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 March 2026AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)6 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered the assessee's detailed submissions in the right spirit. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from an order passed by the CIT(A) concerning an addition made by the AO under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, which was seized by the Railway Police. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) did not properly consider their detailed submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessee's detailed submissions regarding the seized amount, and if not, whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 69A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT DR
Hearing: 09.03.2026

सुनवाईक�तारीख/ Date of hearing: 09.03.2026 11.03.2026 उ�ोषणाक�तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

In this case on the last date of hearing, none attended on behalf of the assessee, but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication with the help of the Ld. DR.

2.

This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), dated 25.08.2025, passed by Ld. CIT(A)-3, Gurgaon. In this case, the Ld. AO is seen to have passed an order u/s 144 of the Act by adding an amount of Rs.27,66,000/- u/s 69A of the Act. As is understood from the Ld. AO’s order the impugned amount was seized by the Railway Police at Patiala.

2.1 The aggrieved assessee approached the Ld. CIT(A) where it is seen that 60 page order has been passed in which virtually a single page (page 58) of the impugned order contains any worthwhile discussion. It is also seen that pages 1 to 57 virtually extract the assessee’s detailed submissions, regarding which a cursory glance shows that not much discussion is there on the same.

3.

The Ld. DR took us through the orders of the authorities below and stated that the assessee could never furnish any worthwhile evidence in support of his clam regarding the justifiability of the impugned amount.

4.

We have carefully considered the submissions of Ld. DR and have also gone through the documents before us. We find that the very detailed and lengthy submissions of the assessee have not been considered in the right spirit by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. It is also expected that the Ld. CIT(A) would consider any legal ground that the assessee may raise before him and adjudicate on such grounds as well.

5.

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11.03.2026

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →