INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUDHIANA V. SUNIL KUMAR, LUDHIANA

ITA 833/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which set aside the ex-parte assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The original assessment included unexplained cash deposits and unsecured loans as income. The CIT(A) found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to present evidence during the assessment and thus remanded the case for a fresh assessment. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, supporting the CIT(A)'s decision to ensure a fair hearing and proper consideration of all evidence.

• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Chandigarh
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: . RANJIT KAUR LD.
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH PHYSICAL HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No.833/CHANDI/2025 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2017-18) ITO Ward 3(1), Aayakar Bhawan Rishi Nagar, Ludhiana - 141001 बनाम/ Vs. Sh. Sunil Kumar Village : Kokowal, Vishal Nagar Beas, Hosiery Complex Ludhiana - 141001 ˕ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AEFPK-8848-H (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : None ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 23-03-2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 24-03-2026 आदेश / O R D E R Laliet Kumar, (Judicial Member) This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated 06.05.2025, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2017- 18. 2. The brief facts of the case, as emanating from the assessment order, are that the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer Printed from counselvise.com under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on account of non- compliance on the part of the assessee. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee failed to produce the necessary books of account and supporting evidence despite the opportunities afforded. Consequently, the Assessing Officer proceeded to frame the assessment ex-parte and made additions, inter alia, on account of cash deposits in bank amounting to Rs. 5,97,400/- and unsecured loans amounting to Rs. 2,88,50,000/-, treating the same as unexplained income of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 4. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the material available on record and the written submissions filed by the assessee during appellate proceedings, observed that the assessment was framed ex parte without a proper opportunity to the assessee. It was further noted that the assessee had furnished documentary evidence before the appellate authority, which was not produced before the Assessing Officer and which had a direct bearing on the issues involved in the assessment. Taking into consideration the amendment brought in section 251 of the Act and in order to meet the ends of justice, the Ld. CIT(A) set aside the assessment order and restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for framing a fresh assessment after affording an adequate opportunity to be83 heard to the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com 5. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal against the aforesaid action of the Ld. CIT(A). 6. At the time of the hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite the service of notice. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record. 7. The Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the assessment order and contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in setting aside the assessment order without adjudicating the issues on the merits. It was submitted that the assessee was provided sufficient opportunities during the assessment proceedings; however, the assessee failed to comply, and therefore, the Assessing Officer was justified in completing the assessment under section 144 of the Act. It was further contended that the Ld. CIT(A) ought not to have granted another opportunity to the assessee and the order of the Assessing Officer deserved to be upheld. 8. We have considered the submissions of the Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the orders of the authorities below. It is an admitted position that the assessment in the present case was completed ex parte under section 144 of the Act. It is also evident from the record that during the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee furnished written submissions along with documentary Printed from counselvise.com evidence which were not available before the Assessing Officer at the time of framing the assessment. 9. The Ld. CIT(A), after taking note of these facts, has exercised the powers vested under section 251 of the Act and has set aside the assessment order with a direction to the Assessing Officer to frame a fresh assessment after considering the evidence and after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Such action of the Ld. CIT(A), in our considered opinion, is in consonance with the principles of natural justice and is aimed at ensuring that the matter is adjudicated on merits after proper verification of facts. 10. The contention of the Revenue that sufficient opportunities were granted during the assessment proceedings cannot, by itself, be a ground to deny consideration of evidence which has subsequently been brought on record and which goes to the root of the matter. The direction of the Ld. CIT(A) does not cause any prejudice to the Revenue; rather, it affords an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to re-examine the issues afresh in accordance with law. 11. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in setting aside the assessment and restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. Printed from counselvise.com 12. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in open Court on 24/03/2026 -Sd- -Sd- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (LALIET KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AS Dated: 24/03/2026 आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH Printed from counselvise.com "