SATYA PARKASH SHOKEEN,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 4895/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 July 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A)'s order did not specify the mode of service of notices or provide observations about the assessee's knowledge, despite 11 notices being issued. To ensure the assessee a fair opportunity to contest the case on merits, the Tribunal allowed the appeals for statistical purposes and restored all issues (on merits and law) to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after proper service of notice.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s orders for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2019-20. The assessee contended that they failed to appear before the CIT(A) because notices were not properly served, citing a precedent case of their wife where similar issues were restored to the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was properly served notice by the CIT(A) and afforded an adequate opportunity to be heard, thus rendering the CIT(A)'s order valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Pulkit Saini, Advocate

For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR

Hearing: 01.07.2025

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITAs No.4893 to 4899/Del/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2019-20 Satya Parkash Shokeen, Vs ITO, A-99, Chhawla, Central Circle-27, Delhi – 110 071. New Delhi. PAN: AXQPS5435A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Pulkit Saini, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 01.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : .07.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 11.01.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi, for AY 2013-14 to 2019-20, respectively.

At the time of hearing, the ld. AR has submitted that before the CIT(A) the assessee had failed to appear as the notice was not served. It was pointed out that in the case of the assessee’s wife Anita Shokeen, vide ITAs No.11 & 12/Del/2025, order dated 13.05.2025, the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal has restored the issues on merits to the files of the CIT(A) as she was also not

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →