Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) for assessment years 2017-18 to 2021-22. The assessee contended that the appeals were barred by limitation and that the Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeals ex-parte without giving due opportunity of hearing.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee intended to raise questions regarding electronic evidence, which could not be raised earlier. The Tribunal restored the issues on merits and legal issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeals ex-parte without giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and whether the appeals were barred by limitation.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 153C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “G” BENCH: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
ORDER PER BENCH : The captioned appeals are filed by the assessee against the different orders passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-26, New Delhi [“Ld.CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising from the different assessment orders are tabulated as under:-
CIT(A)’s AO’s order Assessment No. Years order dated dated Order passed u/s 1. 2048/Del/2025 2017-18 12.02.2025 29.02.2024 153C r.w.s. 143(3) 2. 2049/Del/2025 2018-19 12.02.2025 29.02.2024 153C r.w.s. 143(3) 3. 2050/Del/2025 2019-20 12.02.2025 29.02.2024 153C r.w.s. 143(3) 4. 2051/Del/2025 2020-21 12.02.2025 29.02.2024 153C r.w.s. 143(3) 5. 2052/Del/2025 2021-22 12.02.2025 29.02.2024 153C r.w.s. 143(3)
On hearing both the sides, we find that after arguing the appeals at some length with regard to the additional grounds raised by the assessee questioning the impugned assessment order on the basis of being barred by limitation, it was further contended that Ld.CIT(A) has decided the appeals ex-parte without being giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Ld.AR has also pointed out that the assessee intended to raise questions with regard to admissibility of electronic evidences but came could not be raised. After going through the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A), we find that although in the order of Ld.CIT(A), all notices issued to the assessee are mentioned. However, looking to the mode of service the ends of justice, requires an opportunity to contest on merits as well as questions of law which are also raised before us.
The issues on merits and the legal issues as now raised are restored to the file of Ld.CIT(A) to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing and decide the appeals afresh in accordance with law.
In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.