Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeDirect TaxITAT Restores Rs. 1 Crore Addition Dispute, Grants Fresh Hearing Despite 273-Day...

ITAT Restores Rs. 1 Crore Addition Dispute, Grants Fresh Hearing Despite 273-Day Delay on Rs. 3K Cost

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, restored an income tax appeal involving a ₹1 crore addition made under a best judgment assessment after condoning a 273-day delay in filing the appeal. 

However, the bench of Laliet Kumar (Judicial Member) and Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) made the relief conditional upon the assessee depositing ₹3,000 in the Poor Patient Relief Fund of PGI Hospital, Chandigarh. 

The assessee challenged an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), dated 13 November 2024, which had upheld a best judgment assessment framed under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on 18 December 2018.

Buy Now: INCOME TAX E-COMPILATION – JUNE 2026

The Registry noted that the appeal before the Tribunal had been filed with a delay of 273 days. The assessee sought condonation of the delay by filing an affidavit. At the hearing, however, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee, while the Departmental Representative argued that the appeal deserved dismissal. 

The assessment had been completed on a best judgment basis under Section 144, during which the Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹1 crore, treating it as investment in certain immovable property.

Since the assessee had not effectively represented the case before the appellate authority, the CIT(A) confirmed the assessment without examining the merits of the dispute. Dissatisfied with this outcome, the assessee approached the ITAT. 

The Tribunal observed that the dispute involved a substantial addition and that the principles of natural justice warranted giving the assessee one more opportunity to present the case.

Accordingly, the Bench admitted the appeal despite the delay and directed that the matter be remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo adjudication on merits. 

The Tribunal made it clear that the fresh opportunity would be available only if the assessee deposited ₹3,000 within 30 days from receipt of the order in the Poor Patient Relief Fund of PGI Hospital, Chandigarh.

The assessee has also been directed to furnish proof of the payment before the CIT(A), who will thereafter proceed to decide the appeal afresh on merits. The Tribunal further directed the assessee to diligently plead and substantiate the case during the remanded proceedings. 

The Chandigarh Bench allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, effectively setting aside the earlier appellate order and restoring the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh adjudication. 

Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy

To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Read More: Interest on Unspent Govt. Grants Can’t Deny S. 10(23C)(iiiab) Exemption to Government-Funded Educational Institution: ITAT

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

GSTAT Dismisses Dept. Appeal Over Rs. 7.35 Lakh Interest Demand as Below Rs. 20 Lakh Monetary Limit

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has dismissed a Revenue...

GST Refund Can’t Be Denied by Questioning ITC Eligibility Without S. 73 or 74 Proceedings: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has held that a...

Education Provider Need Not Be University to Claim Service Tax Exemption for Recognised Degree Courses: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has held that...

Subsequent Deposit of Full 10% Meets Mandatory Pre-Deposit Requirement: CESTAT

The New Delhi Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT)...

More like this

GSTAT Dismisses Dept. Appeal Over Rs. 7.35 Lakh Interest Demand as Below Rs. 20 Lakh Monetary Limit

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has dismissed a Revenue...

GST Refund Can’t Be Denied by Questioning ITC Eligibility Without S. 73 or 74 Proceedings: GSTAT

The Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Ernakulam Bench, has held that a...

Education Provider Need Not Be University to Claim Service Tax Exemption for Recognised Degree Courses: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has held that...