Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against orders of the CIT(A) for AYs 2013-14 to 2019-20. The assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) because notices were not served. A similar issue in the case of the assessee's wife led to the restoration of issues on merits.
Held
The Tribunal held that since the mode of service of notices and the assessee's knowledge of the notices were not mentioned in the impugned order, it was fair to give the assessee an opportunity to contest on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals should be allowed for statistical purposes and restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing if notices were not properly served on the assessee.
Sections Cited
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
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