KARAMJIT SINGH TOOR, LUDHIANA,LUDHIANA vs. JAO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3, KHANNA, KHANNA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that a small delay of 71 days should have been condoned, emphasizing principles of natural justice to provide another opportunity of hearing. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the case was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to frame assessment de novo, with the assessee directed to substantiate its case.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an assessment for AY 2018-19, where the AO made an addition of Rs. 40.16 Lacs for agricultural income under section 144 (best judgment basis) due to the assessee's failure to represent during assessment proceedings. The CIT(A) subsequently did not condone a 71-day delay in the appeal, leading the assessee to further appeal to the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in not condoning a 71-day delay and denying an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, necessitating a de novo assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHANDIGARH
Before: HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018- 19 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC dated 16-01-2025 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. AO on best judgment basis u/s 144 on 19-04-2021. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of Rs.40.16 Lacs which represent agricultural income as shown by the assessee. The assessee failed to make any representation during assessment proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay of 71 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The only prayer of Ld. AR is condonation of delay and another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. The Ld. AR stated that the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case.
We find that a small delay of 71 days could have been condoned considering the background of the assessee. Nevertheless, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to provide another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case before Ld. AO. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and Ld. AO is directed to frame assessment de novo. The assessee is directed to plead and prove its case forthwith.
The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 18th February, 2026.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
