VARINDA SHARMA,RAJPURAHO, NILPUR, PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-1, BARNALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 391/CHANDI/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 July 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice and the assessee's plea, set aside the impugned order. The assessment was restored to the AO for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee an opportunity to substantiate their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the confirmation of an addition of Rs. 27.19 Lacs for unexplained investment. The assessee failed to substantiate the investment during assessment and first appeal proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to substantiate unexplained investment in light of the principles of natural justice?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

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

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Ms. Varinda Sharma ITO - Ward -1 बनाम/ House No. 19A, Guru Arjan Dev Colony K.C. Road Vs. Rajpura H.O Nilpur, Patiala-140401 Barnala.148101 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. EHMPS-5893-E (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by Sh. Ashok Goyal (CA) and Shri Nikhil Goyal (CA) – Ld. ARs : ��थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Tarundeep Kaur (CIT) – Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 25-06-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 01-07-2025 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 Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 11-01-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 28-12-2018. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of unexplained investment for Rs.27.19 Lacs. The assessee failed to substantiate the same during the course of assessment proceedings. The position remained the same during first appeal and accordingly, the assessment was confirmed against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has pleaded that the assessee is in a position to substantiate the sources of investment and accordingly, sought another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities. The same has been opposed by Ld. CIT-DR.

2.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and considering the plea of Ld. AR, we deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. AO. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the assessment is restored back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 01-07-2025.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →