JAGDISH CHAND,KURUKSHETRA vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “बी” , चǷीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH

HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE

ŵी िवŢम िसंह यादव, लेखा सद˟ एवं ŵी परेश म. जोशी, Ɋाियक सद˟
BEFORE: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM & SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI, JM

आयकर अपील सं./ ITA NO. 558/Chd/2024
िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2011-12

Jagdish Chand
S/o Shri Babu Ram, H.No. 867/22,
Partap Colony, Kurukshetra-136118,
Haryana
बनाम

The ITO
Ward-1
Kurukshetra
˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AIOPC8757C
अपीलाथŎ/Appellant
ŮȑथŎ/Respondent

िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by :
Shri B.M. Monga, Advocate and Shri Rohit Kaura, Advocate
राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by :
Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing :
23/01/2025
उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23/01/2025

आदेश/Order

PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC,
Delhi dt. 16/03/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessment was completed under section 144 vide order dt. 18/12/2018 wherein an amount of Rs. 20,54,000/- has been brought to tax as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has since sustained the said order on account of non-prosecution on behalf of the assessee.

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us.

During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. It was submitted that only one notice was issued by the ld CIT(A) and even the said notice was not been served on the assessee and immediately, thereafter, the impugned order was passed and therefore, the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from 2

attending to the proceedings before CIT(A). It was further submitted that even on merits, no finding has been recorded by the ld CIT(A) and the assessee is a petty scooter mechanic and running a small shop and has deposited only a sum of Rs
11,04,000/- instead of Rs 20,54,000/- as stated by the AO and the said deposit is his business receipts and whole of such receipts cannot be brought to tax. It was accordingly submitted that assessee be allowed one last opportunity and the matter may be remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh and it was submitted that the assessee shall attend to the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and file the necessary information/documentation.

Per contra, the Ld. DR has relied on the order of the lower authorities.

After hearing both the parties and perusing the material available on the record, we find that the assessee deserves one more opportunity and cannot be condemned unheard and therefore, keeping in view principles of substantial justice, the matter is remitted to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 23/01/2025 परेश म. जोशी

िवŢम िसंह यादव
(PARESH M. JOSHI)

( VIKRAM SINGH YADAV)

Ɋाियक सद˟ / JUDICIAL MEMBER

लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ/ The Appellant
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/ The Respondent
3. आयकर आयुᲦ/ CIT
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च᭛डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
5. गाडᭅ फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार/

JAGDISH CHAND,KURUKSHETRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA, KURUKSHETRA, HARYANA