INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA vs. SUSHMA GOYAL, LUDHIANA
आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT &
SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 15/CHD/2025
Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2013-14
The ITO,
Ludhiana
बनाम
Vs.
Sushma Goyal,
29/1, The Mall,
Near Govt College for Women, Civil Line,Ludhiana
èथायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAVPG4168J
अपीलाथȸ/Appellant
Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent
( Virtual Hearing )
Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : None
राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
(Virtual Mode)
सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing
:
11.08.2025
उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement
:
12.08.2025
आदेश/Order
Per Krinwant Sahay, AM:
Appeal in this case has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 20.11.2024 of Ld. CIT(A), National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.
2. Grounds of appeal are as under: -
1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals) has erred in allowing the appeal of 15-Chd-2054
Sushma Goyal, Ludhiana the assessee and setting aside the matter to the file of AO, without going into and discussing the merits of the case that Assessing
Officer had given several opportunities to file the reply to the assessee
2. That, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee and setting aside the matter to the file of AO, for adjudication without taking into consideration whether there were justifiable grounds for making total non- compliance by the assessee before the CIT(A) as well as AO.
3. That, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee, and setting aside the assessment order back to the file of the A.O after merely provoking the newly inserted provision 251(1)(a) to section 251 of the Income
Tax Act. 1961. 4. That, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals) has failed to appreciate the fact that the addition of Rs. 3,56,27,000/- made by the AO being unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act. 1961 and the assessee had failed to furnish any explanation on this issue during the course of assessment proceedings.
5. That, reliance is placed on the judgement of Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Vs. Ashokji Chanduji Thakor dated 27.06.2018 wherein the order passed by the Hon'ble ITAT was quashed & order of AO/CIT(A) were restored.
15-Chd-2054
Sushma Goyal, Ludhiana
That the appellant craves leave to add or amend any ground of appeal before it is finally disposed.
Although the Revenue has taken six grounds of appeal in this case but the main issue involved is the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in allowing the appeal of the Assessee and setting aside the assessment order back to the file of the Assessing Officer after invoking the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 4. During proceedings before us, the ld. DR submitted that instead of deciding the appeal on merit, the CIT(A) has remanded it back to the file of the AO. 5. We have seen the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which was passed by him on 20.11.2024. We find that there is an amendment to section 251 of the Act in the year 2024 w.e.f 1.10.2024 which says as under: “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
15-Chd-2054
Sushma Goyal, Ludhiana
[Provided that where such appeal is against an order of made under section 144, he may set aside the assessment and refer the case back to the Assessing
Officer for making a fresh assessment).
We find that the assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144, therefore, the appellate order passed on 14.11.2024 is very much covered under the new sub section inserted in section 251 w.e.f 1.10.2024. Accordingly, we find that the action of the Ld. CIT(A) is very much justified. Thus, the Revenue’s appeal on this issue is dismissed. 7. In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced on 12.08.2025. ( RAJPAL YADAV )
Accountant Member
“आर.के.”
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. 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/