Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals challenging ex-parte orders from the CIT(A) for assessment years 2013-14, 2016-17, and 2017-18, which affirmed the Assessing Officer's additions/disallowances in proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) had proceeded without a substantive appellate adjudication, and the assessee also did not appear before the Tribunal.
Held
Recognizing the CIT(A) proceeded ex-parte and potential communication gaps in the faceless hearing system, the Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to provide three effective opportunities, with the onus on the taxpayer to plead and prove their case.
Key Issues
Whether ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(A) without proper adjudication are valid, especially considering potential communication issues in the faceless hearing system, and if such cases should be remanded for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
147, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Avdhesh Kumar Mishra
Asstt. Year : 2016-17 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Israni Buildwell Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, S-12, Green Park Main, Green Park Central Circle-6, Market, New Delhi-110016 New Delhi-110055 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCI6565N Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 29.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 29.07.2025 ORDER Per Bench: These assessee’s three appeals 755 & 756/Del/2025, for Assessment Years 2013-14, 2016-17 and 2017-18, arise against the CIT(A)-24, New Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1071162298(1), 1071162402(1) & 1071162474(1) dated 12.12.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte 755 & 756/Del/2025 Israni Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the CIT(A) to first frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.
Mr. Dayainder Singh Sidhu vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.
Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeals back to the CIT(A) for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his