MUKARRAM KHAN,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 323/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 July 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the Assessing Officer's and CIT(A)'s orders were ex-parte, and the CIT(A) had not decided all grounds on merits. Therefore, to ensure justice, the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The Assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which dismissed the Assessee's appeal against an assessment order. The assessment order was passed ex-parte due to the Assessee's non-appearance before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities are sustainable and if the appeal should be restored for de-novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Tarun Khandari, CA and Shri
Hearing: 23/07/2025Pronounced: 23/07/2025

ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

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 22/11/2024 for the Assessment Year 2022-23.

2.

An assessment order came to be passed on 26/02/2024 u/s 144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 22/11/2024 vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 22/11/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided on the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de- novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.

6. In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →