PARAMJIT SINGH,MOHALI, PUNJAB V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

MA 108/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a Miscellaneous Application filed by Paramjit Singh under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking the recall of an order dated 17.04.2025. This order, initially believed to pertain to his appeal regarding the addition of Rs. 70,61,254 as non-genuine agricultural income for the Assessment Year 2018-19, was later found to relate to a different matter entirely. Both the assessee's counsel and the Departmental Representative acknowledged the mistake, leading to the Tribunal's decision to recall the order and schedule a new hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785001 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANJIT KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRUTI KHANDELWAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,चǷीगढ़ Ɋायपीठ “बी” , चǷीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH HEARING THROUGH: PHYSICAL MODE ŵी लिलत क ुमार, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल, लेखा सद˟ BEFORE: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR, JM & SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM M.A No. 108/Chd/ 2025 In (ITA No. 548/Chd/2023) (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Paramjit Singh Vill: Hanali Khera, Dist: Fatehgarh Punjab-140406 बनाम The ITO Ward-6(1) Chandigarh ˕ायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: DMHPS4546F अपीलाथŎ/Appellant ŮȑथŎ/Respondent िनधाŊįरती की ओर से/Assessee by : Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate राजˢ की ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17/10/2025 उदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 11/11/2025 आदेश/Order PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M: The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, seeking recall of the order dated 17.04.2025 passed by this Hon’ble Tribunal in ITA No. 548/Chd/2023 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appellant had preferred an appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal on 05.09.2023 against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Gurgaon dated 13.03.2023, wherein the addition of Rs. 70,61,254/- was sustained by treating the agricultural receipts as non-genuine and consequently making addition under section 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits. 3. The appeal was duly heard by the Hon’ble Bench on 16.04.2025 and order was pronounced on 17.04.2025. However, WAS submitted by Ld. AR Printed from counselvise.com 2 that the order so pronounced inadvertently relates to an altogether different matter, though bearing the same appeal number. 4. The order dated 17.04.2025, as per record, pertains to a case concerning penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(b) for the Assessment Year 2012-13, involving a different assessee and entirely unrelated facts. 5. It was further pointed out that the appellant’s substantive grievance— pertaining to the addition of Rs. 70,61,254/- on account of alleged non- genuine agricultural income—has not been adjudicated at all in the said order. 6. The Ld. Counsel thus submitted that there is an apparent mistake on record, as the order passed in the name of the present appellant corresponds factually and legally to an entirely different case. It is therefore prayed that, in the interest of justice, the Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly recall the order dated 17.04.2025 and restore the appeal for fresh hearing on merits. 7. The Ld. DR, while supporting the order of the lower authorities, fairly submitted that since the order dated 17.04.2025 appears to pertain to an entirely different matter, there exists an apparent mistake on record. The Ld. DR therefore submitted that the said order may be recalled, and the appeal may be fixed for hearing on merits, in the interest of justice. 8. We have carefully considered the contents of the Miscellaneous Application and perused the record. It is evident that the order dated 17.04.2025 passed in ITA No. 548/Chd/2023 does not correspond to the appeal filed by Sh. Paramjit Singh for AY 2018-19. The said order, in fact, relates to a different matter concerning penalty u/s 271(1)(b) for AY 2012-13. 9. In view of the above, we find that an inadvertent and apparent mistake has crept in the record, which warrants rectification under section 254(2) of the Act. Accordingly, the order dated 17.04.2025 passed in ITA No. 548/Chd/2023 is hereby recalled. Printed from counselvise.com 3 10. The Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hearing afresh in due course, after issuing appropriate notice to both parties. 11. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 11/11/2025 Sd/- Sd/- मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल लिलत क ुमार (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (LALIET KUMAR) लेखा सद˟/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ɋाियक सद˟ /JUDICIAL 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 "