SHEREE MAA CHINTPURNI ALLOYS,PUNJAB vs. NFAC DELHI JURISDICTIONAL OFFICER WARD 1 GOBINDGARH, PUNJAB

PDF · subscribers
ITA 859/CHANDI/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 June 2025AY 2018-2019Bench: SHRI LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that due to potential communication gaps in the faceless regime and to uphold principles of natural justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A). Accordingly, the order was set aside and the appeal was restored.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose from an order by the CIT(A) confirming an assessment framed by the AO on best judgment basis. The assessee's grievance was the assessment of estimated business income and confirmation of addition u/s 68.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity for hearing before the CIT(A) to substantiate their case, considering principles of natural justice and potential communication gaps in the faceless regime.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 68

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

Per Laliet Kumar (Judicial Member ) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Central (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 30-10-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s. 144 of the Act on 12-04-2021. The sole grievance of the assessee is assessment of estimated business income and confirmation of addition u/s 68. The Ld.

1.

CIT(A) has confirmed the same for want of any representation from the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has sought 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 deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. CIT(A). 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.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 09-06-2025.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →