FARIDABAD EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,NEAR NTPC MUJEDI ROAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTIONS WARD, EXEMPTIONS WARD FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers

ITA 874/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)1 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. Considering that the assessee was not heard by the CIT(A) and the grounds of appeal were not properly adjudicated, the Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC for Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2017-18. There was a delay in filing these appeals, attributed to the employee of the appellant overlooking notices. The CIT(A) had passed ex-parte orders as the assessee did not participate.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be decided ex-parte when the assessee was not given an opportunity to be heard by the lower appellate authority?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SH. YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR

Hearing: 19/05/2025Pronounced: 19/05/2025

Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 19/05/2025 Date of Pronouncement 19/05/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: Both the above captioned appeals are filed by the Assessee against the order of the CIT (A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) dated 25/10/2023 pertaining to the Assessment Years2012-13 and 2017-18 respectively.

None appeared for the Assessee and the notices issued by the registry retuned as unserved. Considering the issue involved in the present Appeal, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal after hearing the Ld. Departmental Representative and verifying the material on record.

There is a delay of 64 days in filing the above appeals. The Assessee filed application for condonation of delay contending that the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) have been over looked/ignored by the employee of the appellant, therefore, there is a delay in filing the captioned appeals. For the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay, the delay of 63 days in filing the present Appeals hereby condoned.

Heard, the Department's Representative. The Ld. CIT(A) passed the order impugned for both Assessment Year 2012-13 and 2017-18 ex-parte wherein the Assessee has not participated in the appellate proceedings.

Further, the Grounds of Appeal of the Assessee have not been properly adjudicated by giving opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue involved in the Appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to pass the order in accordance with law after hearing the Assessee. The Assessee is also directed to participate in the first appellate proceedings without fail and put forth his case.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee in & 874/Del/2024 are partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th May , 2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →