Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against four ex parte orders passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC for assessment years 2013-14 to 2016-17. These orders pertained to proceedings initiated under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, where the Assessing Officer had made disallowances/additions.
Held
Recognizing the possibility of communication gaps within the newly introduced faceless hearing system leading to the ex parte orders, the Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate the matters afresh, providing the assessee three effective opportunities to present its case.
Key Issues
Whether ex parte appellate orders passed by the CIT(A) should be set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication, especially in cases where communication gaps in faceless hearings might have led to the ex parte proceedings.
Sections Cited
147, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
Date of hearing 26.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.05.2025 ORDER These assessee’s four appeals 1405, 1428 & 1429/Del/2025 for assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s orders, each dated 09.01.2025, having DINs and orders no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1072011184(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2024-25/1072011279(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2024-25/1072011443(1), ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/ 1072011505(1), involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 , 1405, 1428 & 1429/Del/2025. of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in all the instant appeals.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC in it’s lower appellate orders has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.
I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and I am of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.
Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant four appeals back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for their 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 2 | P a g e , 1405, 1428 & 1429/Del/2025. responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.