HINDUSTAN EPC CO PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 11(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2467/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 September 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte without sufficient opportunity of hearing and without following the principles of natural justice. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee contended that they were not given sufficient opportunity to be heard, violating the principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing violates the principles of natural justice and Section 250(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Raj Kumar Chauhan&

Hearing: 03.09.2026Pronounced: 09.09.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Raj Kumar Chauhan, Judicial Member & Sh. Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member ITA No. 2467/Del/2026 : Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Hindustan EPC Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs ACIT, 239, Okhla, Phase-III, Okhla Circle-11(2), Industrial Estate, S.O. Tehkhand, New Delhi-110002 South East Delhi, New Delhi-110020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAFCG0610C Assessee by: Sh. A. T. Panda, Adv. Revenue by: Sh. Raghubir Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 03.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 09.09.2026 ORDER Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Judicial Member: The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.01.2026 of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) wherein appeal has been dismissed ex-parte on the ground that despite several opportunities, the assessee has failed to comply with the notices issued from time to time, against assessment order dated 26.12.2019.

2.

At the very outset, the ld. AR submitted that the impugned order has been passed without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee/appellant by the ld. CIT(A). It is further stated

2 ITA No. 2467/Del/2026 Hindustan EPC Co. Pvt. Ltd. that the dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution has violated the principle of section 250(6) of the Act. Hence, it is prayed that matter be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding afresh on merit after granting adequate opportunity of being heard.

3.

The ld. DR, on the other hand, while supporting the judgment of lower authorities has left it to the discretion of the Tribunal to consider the submissions for restoring the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

4.

We have considered the rival submissions and examined the material on record. Admittedly, the appeal by ld. CIT(A) has not been adjudicated on merit. On perusal of the impugned order, we have noticed that there is nothing brought on record to show that the notices sent to the assessee/appellant were duly served upon him or received by him. Section 250(2)(a) lays down as under:

“250(2) The following shall have the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal- (a) the appellant, either in person or by an authorized representative;” 5. Thus, the hearing mandated by Section 250(2)(a) of the Act is not a mere formality but a mandatory statutory

3 ITA No. 2467/Del/2026 Hindustan EPC Co. Pvt. Ltd. requirement for following the principle of natural justice by the quasi-judicial authority.

6.

In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is evident that the impugned order has been passed ex-parte without giving sufficient opportunity of hearing and principle of natural justice has not been followed. The end of justice shall be met in case the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue afresh by affording an effective opportunity of hearing and considering the submissions to be made by the appellant/assessee. The assessee/appellant is also directed to make the necessary submissions/ detailed material before the ld. CIT(A) within the period of 60 days of this order.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 09/09/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitabh Shukla) (Raj Kumar Chauhan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 09/09/2026 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →