ROMAX STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNJAB vs. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NFAC DELHI JAO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(1) LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 167/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 August 2025AY 2021-2022Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, acknowledging principles of natural justice and potential communication gaps in the faceless regime, set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The case was remanded back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, with directions for the assessee to present its case effectively.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of Rs. 778.56 Lacs for alleged bogus purchases, initially framed by the AO under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition due to the assessee's failure to provide an effective representation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming an addition for bogus purchases without allowing effective representation, thus potentially violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

Before: HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 04-12-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 27-12- 2022. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of alleged bogus purchases for Rs.778.56 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the assessment for want of any effective representation from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The only prayer of Ld. AR is another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. CIT-DR.

2.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the possibility of communication gaps during faceless regime, we accept the prayer of Ld. AR. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced on18-08-2025. Sd/- Sd/- (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 18-08-2025. आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

ITAT CHANDIGARH

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →