DHANSHREE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-27, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1855/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 June 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeals to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee three effective opportunities to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's twin appeals for assessment years 2012-13 and 2016-17 arose from the CIT(A)'s ex-parte orders. The CIT(A) had affirmed the Assessing Officer's additions/disallowances without the assessee's participation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in proceeding ex-parte without proper communication or opportunity to the assessee, and whether the appeals should be restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 143(3)

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: 25.06.2025Pronounced: 25.06.2025

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals & 1855/Del/2023 for assessment years 2012-13 and 2016-17, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-31 [in short “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s orders, both dated 20.09.2022, passed in case nos.1010/21-22 and 1012/21-22, respectively, involving proceedings under sections 144/147/143(3) and 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’); respectively. Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

Delay of 213 days in filing both the assessee’s instant appeals, 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 appeals deserve to be dismissed.

4.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) 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.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →