SUNDER PAL,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD -1 , PANIPAT

ITA 6084/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee deserves an opportunity to be heard on merits. The impugned order was set aside and remitted back to the NFAC with a direction to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee preferred an appeal against an order passed by the NFAC. The assessee did not appear before the NFAC despite notices. The assessee also did not appear for the hearing before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity of hearing on merits when they had not appeared before the lower authorities or the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

For Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR

Hearing: 24.06.2025Pronounced: 24.06.2025

Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sunder Pal, Vs ITO, C/o J.B. Sharma, Advocate, Ward 1, 72, BMK Market, Panipat. Near Hotel Hive, GT Road, Panipat. PAN: ASCPP4252D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 14.11.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi.

None has appeared for the assessee at the time of hearing. Heard and perused the records. On perusal of the record, we find that the assessee had not appeared before the NFAC although notices shown to have been issued through ITBA. However, ultimately, without entering into the merits of the case, the

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →