SHALIMAR INFRABUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-23(1), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that no litigant should suffer due to the counsel's lapses and that the ends of justice require the assessee to be given an opportunity to contest the matter on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte due to the alleged lapse of their Chartered Accountant. The assessee filed an affidavit before the ITAT explaining the circumstances.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be allowed to contest the appeal on merits before the CIT(A) after an ex-parte decision due to counsel's alleged lapse.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI & SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA
ORDER Per Anubhav Sharma, JM :
The appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 16/1/20 in appeal no. 10258/18-19 New Delhi for assessment year 2015-16 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-8, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or in short ‘Ld. F.A.A.’) in regard to the appeal before it arising out of assessment order dated 28/12/2018 u/s 153C/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by DCIT Circle-23(1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer or ‘AO’).
Shalimar Infrabuildtech Pvt Ltd. 2 Heard and perused the record.
An adjournment application was filed for the Ld DR Sh. H.K Choudhary however, the Bench was of considered opinion that matter need not be decided on merits as before Ld. CIT(A), the appeal was decided ex-parte and an affidavit of the Director assessee company explaining circumstances has been filed before this Tribunal. It is deposed in affidavit that Sh. Darbara Singh CA was AR who was engaged but failed to make compliances for appeal.
No litigant should suffer due to alleged lapses on part of Counsel and ends of justice require giving opportunity to assessee to contest on merits before Ld. First Appellate Authority. Specially where certain questions of facts, like present, are involved.
Therefore, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes and setting aside the impugned order the issues are restored to the files of Ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee/appellant. Order pronounced in the open court on 09th November, 2022. -Sd/- -Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:09.11.2022
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026