Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee preferred appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14 to 2019-20. The assessee's authorized representative submitted that the assessee had failed to appear before the CIT(A) as the notice was not served.
Held
The Tribunal noted that in a similar case of the assessee's wife, the issues were restored to the CIT(A) as notice was not properly served. Thus, to give the assessee an opportunity to contest on merits, the appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was provided proper notice and an opportunity to be heard before the CIT(A).
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