SWARAN SINGH,AMBALA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBALA, HARYANA

ITA 364/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Swaran Singh, the appellant, who appealed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary grievance was that the order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act was in violation of natural justice and based on incorrect assumptions without appreciating the factual matrix. The Assessing Officer had initially assessed the total income of the appellant at Rs. 25,41,490, based on the belief that the appellant had deposited this amount in cash, without any satisfactory reply or details from the appellant. The Tribunal found that the assessment and appellate orders did not consider the documentary evidence and submissions made by the assessee, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711459 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RANJIT KAUR
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 144

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. 364/CHD/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Swaran Singh, Village-Rampur, P.O.Sarsher Sarsheri, Ambala 133001 बनाम Vs. ITO, Ambala èथायी लेखा सं./ PAN NO: DCRPS2676L अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent ( PHYSICAL HEARING ) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : None ( written submissions) राजèव कȧ ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 21.07.2025 उदघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 22.07.2025 आदेश/Order Per Laliet Kumar, JM : Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 22.01.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. From the grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee, it is gathered that the main grievance of the Assessee is that the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Printed from counselvise.com 364-Chd-2025 Swaran Singh, Ambala 2 Act is in violation of the principles of natural justice and it has further been submitted that the assessment order is based on incorrect assumption and presumption without appreciating the factual matrix of the case. 3. The brief facts of the case are as under: - The appellant is an individual. The appellant had not filed ITR for A.Y. 2011-2012. The assessing officer had reasons to believe that the assessee deposited cash of amounting to Rs. 25,41,490/-, Subsequently, A notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax act, 1961 dated 29.03.2018 was issued along with various other notices. The assessee failed to give a satisfactory reply and submit the required details. Hence, the A.O. completed the assessment and passed order u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act dated 30.11.2018 Assessing total Income at Rs.25,41,490/- 4. Being aggrieved by above, the Assessee is in appeal against the assessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the IT Act, 1961. 5. None appeared on behalf of the Assessee. However, detailed written submissions dated 4.7.2025 have been filed by the Assessee. From the record and submissions of Printed from counselvise.com 364-Chd-2025 Swaran Singh, Ambala 3 the assessee, it appears that the ex-parte assessment order in this case has been passed by the Assessing Officer without considering the documentary evidence produced by the Assessee which is in violation the principle of natural justice, thus, a prayer is made for quashing the assessment order or alternatively to set aside the re-assessment order passed u/s 144 of the Act. 5. Per Contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and the CIT(A) in the appellate order. We have also considered the written submissions of Counsel of the Assessee before us and the submissions of the ld. DR. We find that both the authorities below have passed the impugned orders without considering the material facts, documentary evidences and submissions made by the Assessee during the assessment proceedings as well as during appellate proceedings. Since the issue involved has not been decided by the authorities below on merit by considering Printed from counselvise.com 364-Chd-2025 Swaran Singh, Ambala 4 the material available, therefore, in view of the element of natural justice, we are of this considered opinion that the matter should be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh on merit. 7. 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. 8. In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for Statistical Purposes.] Order pronounced on 22.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (LALIET KUMAR) Accountant Member Judicial Member rkk Printed from counselvise.com 364-Chd-2025 Swaran Singh, Ambala 5 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 "