आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘SMC’, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT &
SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 129/CHD/2024
Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2013-14
Jai Chand HUF,
Vill Palsora,
Chandigarh 160040
Vs.
बनाम
The ITO,
Ward 5 (5),
Chandigarh
èथायी लेखा सं./PAN No: AACHJ2903D
अपीलाथȸ/ APPELLANT
Ĥ×यथȸ/ REPSONDENT
( PHYSICAL HEARING )
Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate
& Shri Ashok Goyal, CA
राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Ved Parkash Kalia, JCIT, Sr. DR
स
ु
नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 06.08.2024
उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 03.09.2024
आदेश/Order
Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:
The appeal in this case has been filed by the Assessee against
the order dated 09.01.2024 of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.
2. Grounds of appeal are as under: -
129-Chd-2024 –
Jai Chand HUF, Chandigarh
2
1. That Whether the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in
dismissing the appeal on account of arbitrary
interpretation of section of 249(4) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961.
2. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case,
the Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in upholding the
Assessment Order without adjudicating merits of
the case.
3. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case,
the Ld. AO had erred in adding the income of Rs.
39,77,114/- belonging to the Individual Jai
Chand having PAN- BDAPC7338H in the hands
of Appellant HUF having PAN- AACHJ2903D
4. That the impugned Order had been passed in
gross violation of the principle of natural justice
and without allowing reasonable opportunity of
being heard to the Assessee.
3. At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted
that in this case the Assessing Officer has passed an ex-parte order
u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') and the ld.
CIT(A) has also dismissed the appeal after giving the finding that the
provisions of section 249 (4) (b) of the Act have not been complied by
the Assessee. The ld. Counsel further submitted that the Assessee
had no occasion to make representation on merit either before the
Assessing Officer or before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Counsel
129-Chd-2024 –
Jai Chand HUF, Chandigarh
3
requested the Bench to remand this case back to the Assessing
Officer for fresh assessment.
4. The ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(A).
5. We have considered the assessment order passed by the
Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Act and the appeal order passed by
the ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal for non-compliance of provisions
of section 249 (4)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, in our opinion, the
Assessee could not get opportunity to bring material fact on record of
the A.O. Therefore, in order to provide natural justice to the
Assessee, the case is remanded back to the file of the Assessing
Officer to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on
affording due and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee.
The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings
before the lower authorities. All pleas available under the law shall
remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly.
6. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced on 03.09.2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
( A. D. JAIN ) ( KRINWANT SAHAY)
Vice President Accountant Member
“आर.के.”
129-Chd-2024 –
Jai Chand HUF, Chandigarh
4
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथȸ/ The Appellant
2. Ĥ×यथȸ/ The Respondent
3. आयकर आय
ु
Èत/ CIT
4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय आͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़/ DR, ITAT,
CHANDIGARH
5. गाड[ फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशान
ु
सार/ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar