RAJENDER KUMAR JAIN,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -61(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 250/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 June 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Recognizing the CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte and considering potential communication gaps in the new faceless hearing system, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee three opportunities to present its case at its own risk.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A)/NFAC for AY 2014-15, which involved proceedings under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, affirming the Assessing Officer's additions. There was a 413-day delay in filing the present appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order should be upheld, or if the case should be restored for fresh adjudication considering the challenges posed by the newly introduced faceless hearing system.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

Hearing: 26.06.2025Pronounced: 26.06.2025

Date of hearing 26.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.06.2025 ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1056026849(1), dated 13.09.2023 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

Delay of 413 days in filing the assessee’s instant appeal, is condoned in larger interest of justice and Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

Mr. Dhanesta, learned departmental representative vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any cogent evidence supporting it’s case; and, therefore, it’s instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

4.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC in it’s lower appellate order has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A)/NFAC has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel, involving the newly

2 | P a g e introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.

6.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →