PANKAJ AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-1(2)(1), MEERUT

PDF

ITA 4949/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 July 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ι.Τ.Α. Νο. 4949/DEL/2024 (A.Y 2014-15) | Appellant | | Respondent | |:---|:---:|:---| | Pankaj Aggarwal 133/124, Raizad Ganj Old Tehsil, Meeerut 250002 (U.P.) PAN: ABNPA5930D | Vs | Assessment Unit Income Tax Department Ward(1) (2)(1), Meerut (U.P.) | | | | |:---|:---| | Assessee by | Sh. Saurabh Pawar, CA, Shri Dinesh Kumar, CA | | Revenue by | Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR | | Date of Hearing | 29/07/20253 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

An assessment order dated 26/05/2023 computed the assessee's income with a significant addition of Rs. 2,37,78,890/- on account of Long Term Capital Gain. The assessee's subsequent appeal against this assessment before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed vide order dated 29/08/2024, leading to the current appeal before the ITAT.

Held

The ITAT found that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order ex-parte without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and did not decide all grounds of appeal on merits. In the interest of natural justice, the matter was remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Key Issues

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing an opportunity of being heard, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and failing to decide the appeal on merits.

Sections Cited

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

For Appellant: CA and Shri Dinesh

Hearing: 29/07/2025Pronounced: 29/07/2025

ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 29/08/2024 for the Assessment Year 2014-15.

Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 26/05/2023 by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 2,47,70,170/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 9,91,280/- by making an addition of Rs. 2,37,78,890/- on account of Long Term Capital Gain. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 26/05/2023, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 29/08/2024, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee.

Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

We have heard the Department's Representative and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the order impugned has been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that while deciding the Appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee on its merits. Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.