RAJEEV SINGH,GREATER NOIDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2426/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 July 2025AY 2011-123 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the CIT(A)/NFAC had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, there was a possibility of communication gaps, especially with the introduction of the faceless hearing system. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the assessee's appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A)/NFAC was directed to adjudicate the matter afresh within three effective opportunities. The assessee was put on notice that they would have to plead and prove their case at their own risk and responsibility in the consequential proceedings. The Tribunal did not decide the merits of the additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer or affirmed by the CIT(A)/NFAC.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sh. Rajeev Singh, is in appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The assessment year in question is 2011-12. The impugned order, dated 17.12.2024, was passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The proceedings before the CIT(A)/NFAC were ex-parte, affirming the Assessing Officer's additions/disallowances. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT when the case was called twice, and therefore, was proceeded against ex-parte. The amount in dispute is not specified.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should restore the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, given that the CIT(A)/NFAC had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee? Assessee's contentions: Not recorded as the assessee was proceeded ex-parte. Revenue's contentions: Not recorded as the assessee was proceeded ex-parte.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 08.07.2025Pronounced: 08.07.2025

Date of hearing 08.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 08.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, 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/250/2024-25/1071308082(1), dated 17.12.2024 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 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 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.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

2 | P a g e Order pronounced in the open court on 8th July, 2025

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →