KULDIP SINGH,CHANDIGARH V. ITO, WARD-5(5), CHANDIGARH

ITA 789/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sh. Kuldip Singh against the orders of the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 5(5), Chandigarh, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The primary grievances included the initiation and continuation of the assessment under sections 148 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the additions made to the assessee's income, which were claimed to be from unexplained sources. The Tribunal noted that the initial assessment was conducted ex-parte and the additions were confirmed without considering the assessee's submissions, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785291 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIVEK VARDHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIKSHIT AGGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 148

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. 789/CHD/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sh. Kuldip Singh, 3386, Sector 46C, Chandigarh 160047 बनाम Vs. The ITO, Ward 5(5), Chandigarh èथायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: BPHPS0923R अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent ( PHYSICAL HEARING ) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 13.10.2025 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 29.04.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13. 2. Grounds of appeal are as under: 1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A), NFAC in Appeal No. CIT (A), Chandigarh- 2/10066/2020-21 has erred in passing Printed from counselvise.com 789-Chd-2025 Kuldip Singh, Chandigarh 2 order dtd. 04.07.2024 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 upholding the action of Ld. AO of initiating, continuing and then concluding the impugned assessment u/s 148 r.w.s. 147 and hence 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 confirming the addition of Rs. 66,19,724/- by treating the term deposits in the bank as unexplained money u/s 69A even when such deposits were out of genuine and explained sources. 4. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,80,148/- u/s 69A on account of interest earned from the term deposits as unexplained money. 5. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the order 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. 6. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion, or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same. Printed from counselvise.com 789-Chd-2025 Kuldip Singh, Chandigarh 3 3. At the very outset, ld. Counsel for the Assessee brought it to the notice of the Bench that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is an ex-parte order without giving Assessee an opportunity to file submissions and subsequently the additions made without taking note of submissions made by the Assessee was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. Counsel for the Assessee requested that the matter may be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for making afresh assessment taking into consideration the written submissions filed by the Assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the findings given by the authorities below and the written submissions as well as arguments of the ld. DR. We are of this considered view that in the fitness of things, the matter should be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for making assessment de novo after giving due and adequate opportunity as required under the law. Printed from counselvise.com 789-Chd-2025 Kuldip Singh, Chandigarh 4 6. Accordingly, the case is remanded back to the file of the AO for adjudication afresh on merit, by considering the submissions, documentary evidence produced by the Assessee and the relevant material available on record. Needless to say, that the Assessing Officer shall afford due, reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the proceedings before the Assessing Officer. All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly. 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 "