SHIVRAJ SINGH,BAREILLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(2), BAREILLY-NEW, BAREILLY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 180/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow04 December 2025AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had not been provided with a reasonable opportunity of being heard during the assessment and appellate proceedings. Based on this finding, the Tribunal decided to remit the disputed additions back to the Assessing Officer. The AO was directed to pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with the law, ensuring that the assessee is given a reasonable opportunity to present their case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. No specific issues were left undecided, as the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shivraj Singh, an individual, failed to file a return of income for Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer (AO) passed an ex-parte assessment order under Section 144/147 of the Income Tax Act on December 5, 2019. The AO determined the total income at Rs. 51,05,000/-, making an addition of Rs. 51,05,000/- under Section 69A and Rs. 8,355/- on account of interest in savings bank accounts. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who dismissed the appeal. The assessee then filed a further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard during the assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer and during the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A)? (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the Income Tax Act). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that they did not receive a reasonable opportunity during the assessment proceedings before the AO and the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A). Consequently, the assessee requested that the disputed additions be restored to the AO for a fresh assessment order. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's representative did not object to the assessee's request and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA & SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C. A.
For Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, Addl. CIT (D.R.)

2012-13 against impugned appellate order dated 24/12/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1071547679(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)”] for short].

2.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case, the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment and passed assessment order under section 144/147 of the I.T. Act on 05/12/2019 and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.51,05,000/- under section 69A of the Act and an addition of Rs.8,355/- on account of interest in saving bank accounts. The order passed by the Assessing Officer was an ex-parte order. Being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being further aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

3.

We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. During the course of hearing learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not get reasonable opportunity during assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer and during appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A). Learned Counsel for the assessee requested that the disputed additions be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for passing fresh order. Learned Departmental Representative did not express any objection to this and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench. In view of the foregoing, the issues in dispute are remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on 04/12/2025)

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →