ANIKET VERMA,PANCHKULA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD PANCHKULA

ITA 1080/CHANDI/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Aniket Verma, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi, which dismissed his appeal for non-prosecution and upheld certain additions to his income under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without providing findings on merit, which necessitated a remand for a fresh decision. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of natural justice and the right to a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785285 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 21-10-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANAV BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VISHAL MOHAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1080/CHD/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Aniket Verma, Tagra Kali Ram Near Sai Mandir, Kalka, Panchkula Haryana 133302 बनाम Vs. The ITO, Ward Panchkula, èथायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: BCFPV6923H अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent ( HYBRID HEARING ) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Vishal Mohan, Sr. Advocate with Shri Parveen Sharma, Advocate (Virtual)] राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Manav Bansal, CIT DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 14.10.2025 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM: Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 29.08.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y. 2022-23. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: Printed from counselvise.com 1080-Chd-2024 Aniket Verma, Panchkula 2 1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi is not justified in dismissing the appeal of the appellant for non-prosecution. The notice tabulated vide para-4 of the appellate orders could not be complied because the appellant not being net savvy person did not come to know about the issuance of said notice. 2 That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi is not justified in upholding the addition of Rs. 78,52,100/- made under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3 That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), is not justified in upholding the addition of Rs.13,94,18,717/- by treating the creditors to the extent as unexplained. 4 That the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is bad in law and facts. 3. At the very outset, ld. Counsel for the Assessee has brought it to the notice of the Bench that the appellate order has been passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte for non- Printed from counselvise.com 1080-Chd-2024 Aniket Verma, Panchkula 3 persecution of the appeal without giving any findings on merit on the basis of material available on record. 4. Per contra Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the findings given by the authorities below, arguments made by the ld. counsel of the Assessee and the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non-persecution without giving any findings on merit on the basis of material available on record. We are of the considered view that although the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order but he should have given his findings on merit also but that had not been done. Therefore, in the fitness of things and keeping in view the element of natural justice, we are inclined to remand it back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 6. Accordingly, the case is remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merit, by considering the submissions of the Assessee and the Printed from counselvise.com 1080-Chd-2024 Aniket Verma, Panchkula 4 relevant material available on record on affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee in accordance with law, Needless to say, that the CIT(A) shall afford due, reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. 7. In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes. Order pronounced on 27.10.2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( LALIET KUMAR ) ( KRINWANT SAHAY) Judicial Member Accountant Member “आर.क े.” आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत/ CIT 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "