GLOBUS CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, GHAZIABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee was not provided a due opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with a proper hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) wrongly assumed no return was filed and passed an order without considering the merits, despite the return and assessment order being filed on the portal. The revenue agreed that the assessee was not provided a due opportunity of hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and without considering the merits of the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: B: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
Date of Hearing : 22.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.03.2023 ORDER PER CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, J.M.
This appeal has been filed by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A)-1, Noida dated 31.12.2018 for A.Y. 2015-16.
The learned counsel of the assessee pressing into service ground no. 2 of assessee submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) has Page 2 of 4 erred in passing ex-parte order which is bad in law and liable to set aside as while doing so the learned first appellate authority has disposed of the appeal ex-party without considering the merit and on frivolous and arbitrary ground. He further contended that the Ld. CIT(A) has incorrectly alleged that no Income Tax return has been filed and nor the assessment order passed by the AO was filed before him and without appreciating the fact that the assessee filed return of income and copy of the assessment order on the Income Tax portal along with requisite document therefore the Ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order on wrong presumption and basis. The learned counsel also submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in making and observations in the order that the appellant did not filed return of income u/s. 139 of the Act and making of assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act without ascertaining the facts of the case as a whole. The learned counsel, thus submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) may kindly be set aside deleting the additions uphold by him. Alternatively, the learned counsel submitted that the matter may kindly be restored to the file of Ld.
Page 3 of 4 CIT(A) for proper adjudication of first appeal after considering the correct and relevant facts.
Replying to the above the learned CIT(DR) submitted that there was gross negligence and non-compliance on the part of assessee during first appellate proceedings. However he did not controvert that the assessee did filed copy of return of income and relevant assessment order on Income Tax portal along with requisite documents. The Ld. CIT(DR), in all fairness, agreed to the contention of the learned counsel of the assessee that the assessee was not provided due opportunity of hearing by the learned first appellate authority during the appeal proceedings. The Ld. CIT(DR) also submitted that if it is found just and proper that the Department no serious objection if the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication of appeal denovo.
In view of above submissions when undisputedly the assessee was not provided due opportunity of hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) then we find it proper and necessary to restore the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to the first appellate stage for a fresh adjudication after allowing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee, without being
Page 4 of 4 influenced with the earlier first appellate order and after being satisfied about the compliance of assessee pertaining to relevant provisions of filing of first appeal including compliance of sub section (4)of section 249 of the Act.
In the result appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17.03.2023.
More judgments on Section 139
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shamsunder Pritesh Malode, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-12(1), HyderabadITA 399/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Radhakishan Potharajula, Karim Nagar vs ITO (Int Taxn)-2, HyderabadITA 2340/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026