BHAGWANT KAUR,MOHALI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1), CHANDIGARH

ITA 122/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Bhagwant Kaur against the order of the CIT(A), which pertained to the assessment year 2013-14. The primary contention was regarding an addition of Rs. 84,00,000 to the assessee's income, treated as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had initially completed the assessment ex parte under section 144, following which the CIT(A) set aside this order and remanded the case for a fresh assessment. The Tribunal's decision dismissed the appeal, supporting the CIT(A)'s directive for a de novo assessment to ensure all facts and documents were properly examined.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 779359 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 24-01-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL. C.A
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice; Opportunity of cross examination
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 271(1)(c); 69

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “ए” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “A”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE ŵी लिलत क ुमार, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी क ृणवȶ सहाय, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 122/Chd/ 2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Bhagwant Kaur Kothi No. 1267/ F/F Sector-68 Mohali SAS Ngar, Punjab-160062 बनाम The ITO Ward-6(1) Mohali, Chandigarh-160001 ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BQHPK4241H अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal. C.A राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 06/10/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 16/10/2025 आदेश/Order PER KRINWANT SAHAY, A.M: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 27/12/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A), NFAC in Appeal No. NFAC/2012-13/10135340 has erred in passing order dtd. 27.12.2024 in contravention of provisions of S. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as \"Act\"). 2. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A)has erred in confirming the actions of Ld. AO in initiating, continuing and then concluding the impugned assessment u/s 148r.w.s. 147/144 and the impugned assessment order deserves to be quashed. 3. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in not allowing the ground of the appellant on addition of Rs. 84,00,000/-wrongly made by Ld. AO u/s 69 and has wrongly remanded the case back to Ld. AO for fresh proceedings/adjudication more-so when the addition was wrongly made, the back material and opportunity of cross examination was not provided. Printed from counselvise.com 2 4. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the orders passed by Ld. AO and then by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 5. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. 3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, had purchased an immovable property for Rs.84,00,000/– during the relevant year. Based on information available with the department, the Assessing Officer noted that no return of income had been filed by the assessee. Consequently, a notice under section 148 was issued on 30.03.2021. 3.1 Despite the issuance of notice under section 148 and subsequent notice under section 142(1) along with a questionnaire, the assessee failed to make compliance or furnish the required details. In the absence of a response, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment ex parte under section 144 read with sections 147 and 144B of the Act on 30.03.2022. 3.2 The Assessing Officer treated the investment of Rs.84,00,000/– made towards the purchase of the property as unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act and assessed the total income at Rs.84,00,000/–. The AO also initiated penalty proceedings under sections 271F, 271(1)(b), and 271(1)(c) and charged interest under sections 234A, 234B, and 234C. 4. Against the order of the AO the assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 5. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee contended that the assessment was framed without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard and that the investment was made out of explained sources. The assessee also requested for a personal hearing through video conferencing under the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2020. Printed from counselvise.com 3 5.1. After considering the submissions, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the matter required further verification and examination of the facts and documents furnished by the assessee. The CIT(A) invoked the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act (effective from 01.10.2024), empowering the appellate authority to set aside an assessment made under section 144 and remand the case to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 5.2 Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) set aside the assessment order dated 30.03.2022 and directed the AO to frame the assessment de novo after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and after carrying out necessary enquiries and verification. The appeal was thus dismissed for statistical purposes. 6. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the course of hearing the Ld. AR submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law as it does not address the merits of the addition made by the AO. It was argued that the addition of Rs.84,00,000/– under section 69 was unjustified, being based merely on assumption without any supporting material, and that the assessee was never afforded the opportunity to explain the source of the investment or cross-examine the concerned parties. 7.1 The Ld. AR further contended that both the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) failed to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing, which constitutes a violation of principles of natural justice. It was prayed that the assessment as well as the appellate order be quashed, or alternatively, that the matter be remanded with directions for proper examination and opportunity to the assessee. 8. Per contra the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities. Printed from counselvise.com 4 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and examined the record. The assessment in this case was completed ex parte under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act on the basis of information regarding the assessee’s purchase of immovable property amounting to Rs. 84,00,000/–. The assessee has contended that the investment was made from explained sources and that no reasonable opportunity was provided to furnish supporting evidence. The Ld. CIT(A), by invoking the newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a), has rightly set aside the assessment and directed the Assessing Officer to make a fresh assessment. In the interest of justice, we find that there is nothing wrong with the order of the Ld. CIT(A). So, we find no reason to interfere in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 10. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 16/10/2025 Sd/- Sd/- लिलत क ुमार क ृणवȶ सहाय (LALIET KUMAR) (KRINWANT SAHAY) Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/ The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयुƅ/ CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, चǷीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाडŊ फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar Printed from counselvise.com "