Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. There was a delay of 119 days in filing the appeal. The grounds of appeal included alleged contravention of Section 250, issues with the assessment initiated/continued/concluded under Section 148, confirmation of an addition of Rs. 67,60,000/- under Section 69, and orders passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was observed that the assessment and appellate orders were ex-parte and not decided on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring a proper opportunity for the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard are valid, and if not, whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
148, 69, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sukhjit Kaur, The ITO, Vill Suleman Shikoh बनाम Ward 2(2), Bhallian, Ropar Vs. Chamkaur Sahib, Rupnangar, Punjab 140111 "थायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: EDSPK0179R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( PHYSICAL HEARING ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 06.01.2026 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 19.01.2026 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM :
Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 14.08.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.
The grounds raised are as under:-
That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A), NFAC in 296-Chd-2025 2 Appeal no. NFAC/2014-15/10224000 has erred in passing order dtd. 14.08.2024 in contravention of provisions of S. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "Act").
2. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the actions of Ld. AO in initiating, continuing and then concluding the impugned assessment u/s 148 and hence the impugned assessment order deserves to be quashed.
That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs. 67,60,000/- u/s 69 on account of alleged unexplained investments made in purchase of property.
4. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the orders passed by Ld. AO and then by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant.
5. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion, or amendment in the grounds of appeal
on or before the disposal of the same.
3. The Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 119 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The Counsel of the Assessee has filed an application along with Affidavit on behalf of 296-Chd-2025 3 the Assessee, making prayer for condonation of delay. The affidavit of the Assessee is as under: - 296-Chd-2025 4 296-Chd-2025 5 296-Chd-2025 6
We have considered the reasons given in the Application / Affidavit and keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned therein, we are inclined to condone the delay.
296-Chd-2025 7
The ld. DR did not have any objection for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merit.
At the very outset, it has been submitted before the Bench that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and the appellate order passed by the CIT(A) are ex-parte order without giving any finding on merit.
Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have considered the findings given by the authorities below and the arguments made by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee as well as the ld. DR.
We find that the Assessing Officer has passed the appellate order ex-parte. Therefore, the Assessee could not file details required by the Revenue before the authorities below. The Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the appellate order on merits on the basis of material available on record. Therefore, keeping in view the element of natural justice, we are inclined to remand it back to the file of the CIT(A) to re-adjudicate the case on merit on the basis of 296-Chd-2025 8 material available on record. In view of this, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say, that the ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present hers case and to furnish necessary evidences and details. The Assessee is also directed to present her case before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when called for and will not contribute in unnecessary delay in the hearing of the appeal.
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 19.01.2026. ( LALIET KUMAR ) Accountant Member “आर.के.”