SHRI NIRMAL SINGH S/ O SHRI NIRANJAN SINGH,FARIDKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -3 (4), FARIDKOT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. This was to ensure the assessee is given adequate opportunity to present their case and provide necessary documentation, adhering to the principles of natural justice.
What were the facts?
The assessee did not file regular returns or respond to notices for reassessment. The CIT(A) upheld the reassessment order, which was based on the AO's belief that the assessee failed to provide corroborative evidence for the sale of agricultural land to explain cash deposits.
What were the issues?
Whether the reassessment order was valid without providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to explain their case. The consequential penalty appeal was also set aside pending the de novo assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
Both the appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi even dated 04.01.2023 in respect of Assessment Year 2012-13. no. 7 pleaded that the ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi has erred in upholding the re- assessment though no reasonable opportunity was given to the assessee to explain his case. So, the matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass denovo assessment order for granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Per contra, the ld. Addl. CIT-DR for the Department submitted that although the AO has passed the re-assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 qua the assessee but it has been due to non compliance and non co- operation on the part of the assessee that compelled the AO to pass an ex- parte order based on the information available on the record, however, he has no objection in remanding the matter back to the file of the AO to pass denovo assessment after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
We have heard the rival contention, perused the material available on record, and the impugned order. Admittedly, the appellant assessee has not filed, its regular return of income u/s 139(1) nor even non-bothered to file return in compliance to the notice u/s 148 by the AO. The ld. CIT(A) has discussed that the appellant and his brother has claimed sale of agricultural provided any corroborative documentary evidences regarding having sold such agricultural land and showing a long term capital gain in their respective return of income for the relevant years. Considering the peculiar facts of the case, we consider it deem fit to remand the matter back to the file of the AO to pass denovo assessment order on merits of the case after considering the written submissions of the appellant assessee and after allowing the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard in view of the principle of natural justice. The assessee is directed to co-operate in the denovo proceedings before the Assessing Officer by filing the necessary detailed information required for completion of the assessment as per law. Accordingly, the matter is resorted back to the file of the AO.
In The assessee has challenged the consequential penalty levied by the AO. Since the quantum appeal has been restored back to the file of the AO for passing a denovo assessment order, hence, the appeal against the penalty order is also set aside and restore back to the file of the AO to adjudicate in consequence of passing the assessment order on merits as above. statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 14.07.2023
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 →- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026