Archive · 2 Oct 2026
ITAT Sends Rs 1.55 Crore Tax Dispute Back
Jusbinder Kour had reported income of Rs 10.41 lakh.
Tax officials found cash deposits and a property purchase that they said needed explanation.
They added Rs 80.94 lakh for unexplained money and Rs 74 lakh for the property.
Kour did not answer several notices from the tax department.
She also did not respond to four notices during her appeal.
The CIT(A) dismissed her appeal without fully discussing the issues.
The ITAT said an appeal must be examined and explained properly.
It sent the case back so Kour can present documents and explanations.
This does not mean she has won or that the tax additions were wrong.
Jusbinder Kour declared Rs 10.41 lakh income for assessment year 2020-21.
The Assessing Officer added Rs 80.94 lakh in unexplained credits and Rs 74 lakh for unexplained property investment.
Kour did not respond to reassessment notices or four notices from the CIT(A).
The ITAT said the CIT(A) should not dismiss an appeal without examining the issues and giving reasons.
The case was sent back for a fresh hearing, but Kour must cooperate and provide supporting documents.
- Who
- Jusbinder Kour, the Assessing Officer, the CIT(A), and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi.
- What
- The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)’s dismissal of Kour’s appeal and ordered a fresh decision on tax additions totaling nearly Rs 1.55 crore.
- When
- The case concerns assessment year 2020-21; Kour filed her return on January 4, 2021.
- Where
- The matter was heard by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Delhi.
- Why
- The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had issued a non-speaking ex parte order without examining the disputed issues or providing reasons.
Appellate Review
Taxpayer Compliance
Whether the appeal could be dismissed summarily
Appellate Review
The ITAT held that the CIT(A) must identify the issues, decide them, and provide reasons under Section 250(6), even when the taxpayer does not respond.
Taxpayer Compliance
The taxpayer did not respond to four CIT(A) notices, and the ITAT said she was equally responsible for the procedural difficulties.
Whether the tax additions were justified
Appellate Review
Kour’s counsel said bank statements, a home loan, a Rs 34 lakh loan, and amounts from relatives could explain the deposits and property purchase and should be examined.
Taxpayer Compliance
The tax authorities treated Rs 80.94 lakh as unexplained money and added Rs 74 lakh for the property because Kour had not explained their sources; the ITAT did not rule on the merits.
What happens next
Appellate Review
Kour has another opportunity to submit documents and explain the transactions during a fresh hearing.
Taxpayer Compliance
If she again fails to respond, the CIT(A) may decide the appeal ex parte on its merits while still following Section 250(6).
- Taxpayer
- Jusbinder Kour
- Assessment year
- 2020-21
- Declared income
- Rs 10.41 lakh, reported as salary income
- Unexplained credits addition
- Rs 80.94 lakh under Section 69A
- Property investment addition
- Rs 74 lakh under Section 69
- Total disputed additions
- Nearly Rs 1.55 crore
- Tribunal’s direction
- The case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with an opportunity for both sides to be heard