PARAMJOT KAUR,PUNJAB V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHANDIGARH

ITA 995/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Paramjot Kaur against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2016-17. The appeal was initially delayed by 220 days, for which a condonation was sought and granted. The primary contention was that the orders were passed ex-parte and the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to present her case, as the notices were sent to an email portal inaccessible to her. The Tribunal, considering these factors and the arguments presented, decided to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, ensuring that the assessee is given a proper hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 836159 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANJIT KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: HARISH NAYYAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, चÖडीगढ़ Ûयायपीठ, चÖडीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 995/CHD/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Paramjot Kaur, 2208, Phase VII, Sector 61, Mohali 160062 बनाम Vs. The ITO, Chandigarh èथायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO. AIAPK8703A अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent ( PHYSICAL HEARING) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Sh. Harish Nayyar, CA राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 15.01.2026 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 11.02.2026 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 18.10.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 2. The Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 220 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The Counsel of the Assessee has filed an application along with Affidavit on behalf of Printed from counselvise.com 995-Chd-2025 2 the Assessee, making prayer for condonation of delay. The affidavit of the Assessee is as under: Printed from counselvise.com 995-Chd-2025 3 Printed from counselvise.com 995-Chd-2025 4 3. We have considered the reasons given in the Application / Affidavit and keeping in view the facts and circumstances mentioned therein, we are inclined to condone the delay. Printed from counselvise.com 995-Chd-2025 5 4. The ld. DR did not have any objection for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 5. At the very outset, the ld. Counsel of the Assessee submitted before the Bench that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is an ex-parte order and the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer without going into the details and affording an opportunity of being heard which is against the principle of natural justice. Further, the notice sent by the CIT(A) was serviced on the e-mail portal to which the Assessee did not have any access. The ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee has a fair case on merit. It is prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 6. Per contra, ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 7. From the record, we find that though numerous grounds have been filed by the Assessee but the main Printed from counselvise.com 995-Chd-2025 6 grievance of the Assessee is that the orders passed by the Assessing Officer are ex-parte orders. The notices sent by the CIT(A) were serviced on the e-mail portal to which the Assessee did not have any access. Furthermore, Ld. CIT(A) has simply confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer without going into the merits of the case and affording an opportunity of being heard which is against the principle of natural justice. 8. 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. 9. 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 Printed from counselvise.com 995-Chd-2025 7 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. 10. In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes. Order pronounced on 11.02.2026. 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 "