RAJENDER SINGH,KARNAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KARNAL
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the appeal was time-barred by 10 days and condoned the delay. The Tribunal upheld the action of the CIT(A) in restoring the issue to the AO for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an exparte order by the NFAC for assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was filed with a delay of 10 days, which was condoned by the Tribunal. The assessee did not appear for the hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed by the assessee was maintainable considering the delay and absence of appearance. Whether the action of the CIT(A) in restoring the issue to the AO was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC’’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE
Rajender Singh, vs. ITO, Ward-1, Karnal Village VPO Bhaini Lkalan, Tehsil Nilokheri, Karnal-132001 Haryana-132001 (PAN: BTEPS3780H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Sangeet Bansal, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 05.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 05.08.2025 ORDER This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 13.03.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2017- 18.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee, despite issue of notice for hearing, hence, I am proceeding exparte qua the assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.
Upon careful consideration, it is noted that the appeal is time barred by 10 days, thus the same is condoned as the delay relates to a very short span of period. I find that AO has passed the exparte order in this case and in appeal Ld. CIT(A) has restored the issue to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh in accordance with law taking additional evidences / facts on record and provide opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In view of the factual matrix, I am of the view that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly restored the issue in dispute to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, which does not need any interference on my part, hence, I uphold the action of the CIT(A) and accordingly, dismiss the appeal of the assessee.
In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 05.08.2025.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
