SALEEM AHMED,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-46(4), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2852/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 July 2025AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps in the new faceless hearing system, which might have led to the ex-parte decision. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication, granting the assessee three opportunities, subject to the condition that they bear the risk and responsibility of proving their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2017-18 arose from proceedings under Section 147, challenged an order by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, resulting in the affirmation of the Assessing Officer's additions without the assessee's representation.

What were the issues?

The core issue was the ex-parte decision by the CIT(A) against the assessee, potentially due to communication failures in the faceless appeal system, leading to the confirmation of AO's additions without proper hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 22.07.2025Pronounced: 22.07.2025

Date of hearing 22.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 22.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073812096(1), dated 28.02.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s in its lower appellate order has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.

3.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands 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.

4.

Faced with this situation, I deem it appropriate, in the larger interest of justice, to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →