HARVINDER SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), MOHALI, MOHALI

1

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

PHYSICAL HEARING

BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT
AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.1245/CHANDI/2024
(िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2012-13)
Shri Harvinder Singh
C/o
Tejmohan
Singh
(Advocate)
#
527
Sector
10-D
Chandigarh
बनाम/
Vs.
ITO
Ward-6(4)
Mohali. 160055
̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.BCAPS 1594 Q
(अपीलाथŎ/Appellant)
:
(ŮȑथŎ / Respondent)

अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by :
Sh. Tejmohan Singh (Advocate) – Ld. AR
ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Vivek Vardhan (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr.
DR

सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
23-06-2025
घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:

आदेश / O R D E R
Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13
arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals), National Fearless Appeal Central (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)]
dated 20-12-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld.
Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 of the Act on 25-12-2019. 2

The Ld. AR stated that the legal grounds as urged by the assessee has not been adjudicated by Ld. CIT(A).
2. From the facts, it emerges that pursuant to receipt of information of cash deposit by the assessee, the case was reopened on the ground that the return of income was not commensurate with the cash deposits. Notice u/s 148 was issued on 29-03-2019 after taking approval of Ld. Pr. CIT-2, Chandigarh. The case was transferred u/s 120 by appropriate authority vide order dated 22-08-2019. The assessee remained non-compliant during assessment proceedings and ultimately Ld. AO assessed total income at Rs.52.95 Lacs.
3. The Ld. CIT(A), exercising remand power u/s 251(1)(a), set aside the assessment back to the file of Ld. AO. No finding was rendered on legal grounds as urged by the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
4. The first and foremost argument of Ld. AR is valid service of notice u/s 148. In the second argument, Ld. AR has questioned the juri iction of Ld. AO on the ground that Ld. AO had no juri iction over the case of the assessee. We find that both these grounds are legal grounds which question the very validity of assessment proceedings.
Quite clearly, the same has not been adjudicated by Ld. CIT(A).
Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) who shall adjudicate the legal grounds of the assessee and if not convinced with legal grounds, explore the possibility of remand back to Ld. AO on merits. All the issues are kept open.

Dated: 01-07-2025. आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant
2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent
3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT
4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR
5. गाडŊफाईल/GF