AVDHESH KUMAR GOEL,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1903/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was silent on the mode of service of notices and dismissed the appeals without touching the merits. Therefore, the impugned orders were set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee preferred appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) dated 06.01.2025. At the time of hearing, an adjournment was sought. The assessee raised a ground that the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without properly serving notice and touching the merits of the case.

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 Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Advocate &, Shri Aman Garg, CA
For Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24.06.2025Pronounced: 24.06.2025

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITAs No.1901 to 1903/Del/2025 Assessment Years: 2015-16 to 2017-18 Avdhesh Kumar Goel, Vs DCIT, EC-9, Ground Floor, Central Circle-28, Inderpuri, New Delhi. Delhi – 110 012. PAN: ADZPG2181Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate & Shri Aman Garg, CA Revenue by : Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

These appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 06.01.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-31, Delhi.

2.

At the time of hearing, adjournment was sought on the basis that some paper book has to be filed. However, the Bench observed that the assessee has raised a ground asserting that the CIT(A) has erred in passing an ex parte order.

ITAs No.1901 to 1903/Del/2025

3.

The ld. DR has submitted that the assessee was given sufficient notice. However, after going through the impugned order of the CIT(A), we find that one the one hand the order is silent on the mode of service of the notices and on the other hand, without touching the merits of the issues at all the appeals were dismissed. Thus, the impugned orders of the CIT(A) are set aside. The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. The issues on merits as well as on law are remitted to the files of the CIT(A) to be decided afresh, after serving due notice of hearing on the assessee.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →