SANJAY KUMAR KHANDELWAL,KATNI vs. ITO WARD-1, KATNI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 43/JAB/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur10 February 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. This was due to the assessee not receiving a reasonable opportunity during both the assessment and first appellate proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was assessed at Rs. 7,42,700, with an addition of Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 69. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT, arguing that they were not given a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was whether the assessee was provided a reasonable opportunity to be heard during the assessment and first appellate proceedings, and the validity of the addition made under Section 69.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JABALPUR BENCH ‘SMC’, JABALPUR

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

2015-16 against impugned appellate order dated 23/02/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1061384213(1) of Addl /JCIT (A)-2, Mumbai [“Addl/JCIT(A)” for short].

(B) In this case, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings and passed assessment order under section order 143(3) of the Act on 18/12/2017 and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.7,42,700/- as against returned income of Rs. 2,42,700/-. An addition of Rs.5,00,000/- was made in the assessment order, under section 69 of the Assessment Year: 2015-16 2 Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee went in appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A), vide impugned appellate order dated 23.02.2024 has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

(C) Both sides have been heard. Materials on record have been perused. At the time of hearing, learned Authorized Representative for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT(A) have passed order without giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He further submitted that the issues in dispute should be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass de novo order. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection, and left the decision to the discretion of the Bench. After hearing both sides and as the assessee did not get reasonable opportunity in the course of assessment proceedings and in the course of appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A); the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and issue in dispute is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order on merits of the case in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. All the grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid order.

(D) In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 06/03/2026)

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →