INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA vs. BALJINDER SINGH, LUDHIANA
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal affirmed that the CIT (Appeals) has the power under Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act to set aside an ex-parte assessment order and remand issues to the Assessing Officer. Finding no error in the CIT (Appeals)'s decision to set aside and remand the case, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT (Appeals) order for AY 2019-20, in which the CIT (Appeals) had set aside an ex-parte assessment order. The original assessment order was passed ex-parte under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, and all issues were remitted back to the Assessing Officer.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT (Appeals) was justified in setting aside an ex-parte assessment order and remanding the case to the Assessing Officer under Section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
The Revenue is in appeal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 27.01.2025 passed for assessment year 2019-20.
The grievance of the Revenue is that ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in setting aside the assessment order and relegating all A.Y.2019-20 2 the issues to the file of Assessing Officer by exercising the powers u/s 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
With the assistance of ld. DR, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that assessment order has been passed ex-parte u/s 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The CIT (Appeals) has been empowered u/s 251(1)(a) of the Act to set aside any issue to the file of AO, if assessment order was passed ex-parte.
After considering the finding of the CIT (Appeals), we do not find any error in it. Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
In result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced on 10.09.2025.
More judgments on Section 251(1)(a)
- Sanjay Kumar Jaisinghani, Raipur vs ITO, Ward-3(1), RaipurITA 699/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Yogesh Ramdas Ghode, Nashik vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), NashikITA 508/PUN/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Income Tax Office, Ludhiana vs Arjun Sood, LudhianaITA 301/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Income Tax Officer, Ayakar Bhawan vs Arjun Sood, Notrth Avenue OppositeITA 216/CHANDI/2025[2014]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026
- Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Chandigarh vs ITO Ward 5(5), ChandigarhITA 1037/CHANDI/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
