SHRI KRISHAN CHAND,PANCHKULA vs. ITO,WARD-2, PANCHKULA
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal. This decision was based on the consistent non-cooperation of the assessee and their counsel, repeated adjournments, and the inability of the counsel to provide necessary details or contact the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Years 2010-11. The case involved additions on account of unexplained deposits and capital gains, with grounds of appeal questioning the assessment order passed under Section 144 and the validity of assessment under Section 147/144 due to lack of proper notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the assessment order passed under Section 144 without affording proper opportunity to the assessee, and whether the assessment framed under Section 147/144 was void due to non-service of notices under Section 143(2) and 142(1).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
�नधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Ajay Jain, CA (Virtual) राज�व क� ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 08.01.2025 उदघोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 18.06.2019 of ld. CIT(A)-4, Ludhiana [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Years 2010-11.
1128-Chd-2019 Krishan Chand, Panchkula 2 2. Grounds of appeal are as under:-
1. That the CIT(A) has wrongly upheld the assessment order passed under section 144 of Income Tax Act by AO without providing the opportunity to explain the deposits in bank & therefore the order passed under section 144 is liable to set aside and restore to file of assessing officer for fresh adjudication after reasonable opportunity to appellant.
2. That the CIT(A) has wrongly sustained addition on the basis of statement of buyer recoded at the back of appellant without providing opportunity to cross examine the buyer despite of fact that specific request has been made to CIT(A) for allowing cross examination of buyer.
3. That the CIT(A) has wrongly upheld the addition of capital gain of Rs. 11610,000/- on account of unexplained deposit without appreciating the fact that the appellant wife has sold agricultural land at Rs 154,00,000/-.
4. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Appeals has sustained the assessment framed under section 147/144 which is void ab into as no notice under section 143(2) & 142(1) has been served on assessee.
In this case since the filing of the appeal the counsel of the Assessee has always being taking adjournments. When the case
1128-Chd-2019 Krishan Chand, Panchkula 3 came up for hearing on 6.1.2025, again the Counsel of the Assessee filed an application for adjournment. It was pointed out by the Bench that it was a 36th occasion that this appeal was listed for hearing on Board but the Assessee never cooperated with the Tribunal. It was categorically brought on record that the last and final opportunity was being given to the Assessee adjourning the case for 37th time for 8.1.20025. On that day, the Counsel of the Assessee Shri Ajay Jain appeared through virtual hearing and submitted before the Bench that the Assessee is living in a foreign country and he does not have even his contact number. The Bench asked him to file details so that the matter may be decided on merit but the Counsel of the Assessee again submitted that he does not have any details of this case with him and he is totally dependent on the Assessee in order to get details to file the same before the Bench.
At the same time when he was asked to contact the Assessee in order to get details, he submitted that he is not having any contact number or address of the Assessee who is living in a foreign country.
1128-Chd-2019 Krishan Chand, Panchkula 4 5. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(A).
We have heard the parties. At this juncture, it was decided that giving further adjournment in this case would not get any result. Therefore, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed for non-submission of any report / relevant documents as well inability of the Counsel of the Assessee to contact him for details etc. Accordingly, appeal of the Assessee stands dismissed.
In the result, Assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced on 16.01.2025.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
