SUNNY,PATIALA vs. ITO, W-1, PATIALA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 807/CHANDI/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh29 October 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that both the assessment order and the first appellate order were not meritorious due to a violation of natural justice. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing a proper opportunity for hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee, running a golgappa stall, deposited Rs. 19,07,000/- in bank accounts. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition under Section 69A for unexplained money as the assessee did not effectively respond to notices. The CIT(A) sustained the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, thus violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144,Section 250,Section 253

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI,

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saldi,CA
For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Hearing: 01.10.2024Pronounced: 29.10.2024
7.

In the result, the impugned order is set aside as and by way of remand to the file of ld. CIT(A).

8.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 29.10.2024.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →