MADAN LAL GARG,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, considering the submissions and the interest of justice, found that a denovo assessment was necessary. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer with directions to decide the issues afresh after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against an order of the Ld. CIT(A) which affirmed the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the AO did not provide adequate opportunity to be heard.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order passed by the AO under Section 147 without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee is sustainable. Whether a denovo assessment is required in the interest of justice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI
(Assessment Year: 2014-15) Madan Lal Garg, vs. ITO, Ward 2 (4), Shop No.32, Opp. Maruti Gate No.2, Gurgaon. Gurgaon Old Delhi Road, Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (PAN : AIDPG4403E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Amit Rai, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11.11.2025 Date of Order : 11.11.2025 O R D E R
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 29.02.2025 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. At the outset, it was submitted by the ld. AR for the assessee that 2. Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) without giving proper opportunity to the assessee and Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the action of the AO. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the authorities below. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Upon 3. careful consideration, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter requires denovo assessment. Therefore, we remit back the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which Ld. DR has no objection. Assessee is directed through his counsel to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 11th day of November, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing.
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. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026