KASPER INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRLCE-25, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3597/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 September 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the learned CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The time period allowed for compliance with the notices of hearing was insufficient, leading to a non-speaking order being passed on merits. The Tribunal found that remanding the matter back to the CIT(A) would meet the ends of justice. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the learned CIT(A) to provide a reasonable opportunity to the assessee for being heard in accordance with law and thereafter pass a speaking order. All other grounds raised by the assessee were kept open, and the CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate all grounds raised before the Tribunal. The ratio decidendi is that an appellate order passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and warrants a remand.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Kasper Information Technology Private Limited, is in appeal against the order of CIT(A)-29, New Delhi, dated 27 February, 2026. The assessment for AY 2017-18 was framed by the ACIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi, under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on 30 March, 2025. The assessee's primary contention, raised in ground No.8 of its appeal, is that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing an adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The assessee highlighted that notices issued by the CIT(A) provided less than seven days for compliance, and adjournments sought by the assessee were not adequately considered.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellate order passed by the learned CIT(A) is against law and facts, being ex-parte and passed without providing adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, thereby violating the principles of natural justice, as per Section 250 of the Act? Assessee's Contention: The learned Counsel for the assessee argued that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The notices issued by the CIT(A) provided insufficient time (less than seven days) for compliance, and the assessee's requests for adjournment were not properly considered. The CIT(A) relied on the decision in Shri B.N. Bhattacharjee and another — 118 ITR 461 (SC) and proceeded to decide the appeal on merits through a non-speaking order, indicating a lack of due process. Revenue's Contention: The learned CIT-DR could not controvert the facts presented by the assessee and agreed for remanding the matter back to the file of the learned CIT(A). No specific arguments were made by the revenue to support the CIT(A)'s order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH-A : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Shri Ankur Agarwal, CAs
For Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer
Hearing: 21.09.2026Pronounced: 23.09.2026

Per Mahavir Singh, Vice President :

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of learned CIT(A)-29, New Delhi in appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-29 10902/2016-17 dated 27 February, 2026. Assessment was framed by the ACIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18 under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide order dated 30" March, 2025. 2. At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to ground No.8 of the appeal and argued that the appellate order passed by the learned CIT(A) is ex-parte and without providing adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in violation of principles of natural justice. The relevant ground No.8 reads as under:-

2 ITA.No.3597/Del/2026

“8. That the order dated 27.02.2026 passed u/s 250 of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi is against law and facts on the file in as much as he was not justified in passing the appellate order ex parte without providing adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Appellant thereby violating the principles of natural justice.”

3.

Learned Counsel for the assessee took us through the order of learned CIT(A) and shown us paragraph No.4 wherein there are three notices issued on 20" August, 2025 for compliance on 26 August, 2025, of 5" January, 2026 for compliance on 7" January, 2026 and of 10" February, 2026 for compliance on 13" February, 2026. Learned Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the notice is less than seven days in each of the hearings and assessee sought for adjournment as noted by the learned CIT(A) in paragraph No.

4.

Learned Counsel pointed out that learned CIT(A) has applied the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri B.N. Bhattacharjee and another — 118 ITR 461 (SC) and stated that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and thereafter, he also decided on merits by a non-speaking order.

4.

When this was pointed out to the learned CIT-DR, he could not controvert the above fact situation and could not support the order of learned CIT(A), rather, he agreed for remanding the matter back to the file of the learned CIT(A).

5.

We have considered the submissions of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. We noted that the learned CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Even the time period allowed to the assessee for compliance of the notices of hearing issued was not sufficient, which resulted in passing of a non-speaking order on merits. Considering all the facts, we are of the considered opinion that it would meets the ends of justice if the assessee is provided

3 ITA.No.3597/Del/2026

reasonable opportunity of being heard in accordance with law. The matter is, therefore, remanded to the file of the learned CIT(A) for providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and thereafter, pass a speaking order in accordance with law. The other grounds raised by the assessee are kept open. Learned CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate all the grounds raised before the Tribunal.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 23" September, 2026. (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT

Date : 23.09.2026

VK.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →