RAJA QURESHI,HAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the order passed by the AO was ex-parte and the assessee was never represented before the authorities below. To prevent miscarriage of justice, the Tribunal set aside the issue to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration after granting the assessee an opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was directed against an order passed by the NFAC, which arose from an Assessment Order passed by the ITO under Section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. There was a delay of 30 days in filing the appeal, which was condoned.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be given a further opportunity to be heard before the CIT(A) when the original assessment order was ex-parte and the assessee was not represented before lower authorities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, DELHI
Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi, dated 16.10.2024 arising out of the Assessment Order passed by the ITO, Ward 3(5) Hapur, dated 23.11.2016 under Section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2013-14.
There is a delay of 30 days in filing the appeal. An application for condonation of delay has been filed contents whereof seems to be genuine. Hence, the delay is condoned.
None appeared at the time of call. It also appears from the record that the order passed by the Ld. AO is admittedly ex-parte one, upon which the appeal was preferred by the assessee which was decided on 16.10.2024 by the Ld. CIT(A). However, since the assessee was never represented before the authorities below in our considered opinion, in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice the assessee be given a further opportunity of being heard to represent its case effectively before the First Appellate Authority. With the aforesaid observation we set aside the issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for consideration afresh and to pass a reasoned order upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidences on record or any other evidence which the assessee may chose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. It is also made clear that in the event, the assessee does not cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A), the said authority would be at liberty to dispose of the issue strictly in accordance with law.
The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 04.06.2025
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
