KRISHNA PUNIA,JIND vs. ITO, JIND

PDF · subscribers
ITA 880/CHANDI/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 January 2026AY 2011-2012Bench: Ld. CIT(A) which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.2 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, applying principles of natural justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, granting the assessee another opportunity to present its case. The CIT(A) was specifically directed not to raise the issue of delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2011-12, which confirmed an AO's addition of Rs.31.85 Lacs for cash deposits. The CIT(A) had not admitted the appeal due to delay and upheld the assessment on merits because the assessee failed to comply with hearing notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A) for a de novo adjudication, despite the appeal being dismissed earlier for delay and non-compliance with notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, CHANDIGARH

O R D E R

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 31-05-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act on 29-03-2022. The only prayer of Ld. AR is another opportunity of hearing before Ld. CIT(A) which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

2.

It emerges that Ld. AO made addition of cash deposits for Rs.31.85 Lacs after rejecting assessee’s submissions. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal for delay and also confirmed the assessment on merits since the assessee did not comply with hearing notices. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

Keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, I deem it fit to accept the prayer of Ld. AR. Accordingly, the appeal is restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The issue of delay would not be raised by Ld. CIT(A).

4.

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 06th January, 2026.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →