SHASHANK SRIVASTAVA,NOIDA vs. ITO,WARD-3(4), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2162/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 July 2025AY 2011-12Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had also proceeded ex-parte against the assessee. Considering the possibility of communication gaps due to the new faceless hearing system, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12 arose from an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC, in proceedings under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case was called twice, but the assessee did not appear and was proceeded against ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication when it was proceeded ex-parte due to non-appearance of the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

Hearing: 16.07.2025Pronounced: 16.07.2025

Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Shashank Srivastava, Vs Income Tax Officer, I-801, Vrinda City, Plot No. GH-02, Ward-3(4), Greater Noida, Noida-201308 Noida-201308 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AOAPS9177E Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Manish Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025 ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1062107991(1) dated 06.03.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing

5.

Mr. Manish Gupta 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.

6.

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.

7.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC 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 own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →