INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA vs. RAJESH GUPTA PROP. M/S SHRI BALAJI TRADING CO., LUDHIANA
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 27.01.2025 passed for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grievance of the Revenue is that ld. CIT (Appeals) has set aside the assessment order for passing the fresh assessment order. A.Y.2017-18 2
With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. We take note of the relevant part of Section 251(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which reads as under : Powers of the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) 251.(1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals)shall have the following powers- (a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment Provided that where such appeal is against an order of assessment made under Section 144, he may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh assessment. x x x 3.1 A perusal of the above would indicate that ld. CIT (Appeals) has power to set aside the assessment order where it was passed ex-parte u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act. We find that in this case, assessment was passed ex-parte and therefore, the ld. CIT (Appeals) has rightly set aside the assessment order for passing a fresh assessment order. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in this appeal. It is dismissed. 4. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 15.09.2025. (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT
“Poonam”
A.Y.2017-18
3
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File
सहायक पंजीकार/