Harbhajan Singh Chahal vs. Income Tax Officer

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The appeal by Harbhajan Singh Chahal for Assessment Year 2011-12 arises from an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 05.01.2026. The Assessing Officer made an addition of cash deposit for Rs.51,53,500/- since the assessee failed to make any representation. The assessee provided additional evidences during the first appeal, which were not admitted, and the assessment was confirmed. The assessee is in further appeal before the tribunal. The Ld. AR sought consideration of additional evidences, which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. The Ld. AR argued that the assessee is in a position to establish the sources of cash deposit. The tribunal found that additional evidences would have a material bearing on the determination of the impugned issue. Therefore, the tribunal accepted the prayer of the Ld. AR and set aside the impugned order. The matter was restored back to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication in the light of additional evidences with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the additional evidences should be considered?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Shri Harish Kumar vs. ITO

  Chennai bench

• Manju Sharma vs. ITO

  Chandigarh bench

• Rajbir Singh vs. ITO, Ward-3

  Chandigarh bench

• Aarti Oil and Allied Products Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer

  Chandigarh bench

• Kanta Devi W/o Suresh Kumar Ishreri vs. Income Tax Officer

  Chandigarh bench

• Mrs. Ranjithkumar Yogalakshmi vs. ITO

  Chennai bench