RAJENDRA SINGH BAGGA,DAMOH vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, KATNI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee, violating the principles of natural justice. The notice period given was extremely short, and the adjournment request was denied unreasonably.
What were the facts?
The assessee purchased a property where the payment recorded in the balance sheet (Rs. 72,00,000) was less than the total payment made (Rs. 78,00,000). The AO made an addition of Rs. 6,00,000 under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act for the difference between the stamp duty value and the actual purchase price, and also under section 68/69 for the unexplained difference in payment.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee and confirming the addition made by the AO.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 147,Section 144,Section 68,Section 69,Section 56(2)(vii)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH, JABALPUR
PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned CIT(A), NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act dated 14.10.2024 whereby learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee filed against the orders of the learned AO under section 147 read with section 144 dated 30.03.2022. The grounds of appeal are under:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing ex- party order without providing adequate opportunity as only three dates for hearing were fixed and that too in the peak periods of filling of tax audits, income tax returns and accordingly assessee was busy in
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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 →- M/S South INDIA Trading Company vs. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026
