SARTHAK JAIN,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-35(5), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1051/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte and that communication gaps might have occurred due to the new faceless hearing system. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 was against an order by the CIT(A)/NFAC, which had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee. The assessee did not appear at the hearing, and the CIT(A)'s order affirmed the AO's disallowances/additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC erred in proceeding ex-parte against the assessee without proper communication, and if the case should be restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 14.05.2025Pronounced: 14.05.2025

Date of hearing 14.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 14.05.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071258237(1), dated 16.12.2024 involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

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

4.

Mr. Sharma vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case.

5.

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. 6. Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →