OMAXE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, directing the assessee to make requisite compliance. This was done in the interest of justice.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance. The assessee requested the matter be set aside and restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the issues?
Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) due to assessee's non-compliance should be set aside and restored for fresh adjudication on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, E: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SMT. RENU JAUHRI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, E: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.- 6050/Del/2026 [Assessment Year: 2017-18] Omaxe Limited, DCIT, 7, Local Shopping Centre, Central Circle-29, Kalaji, Delhi-110019. Vs New Delhi-110055. PAN- AAACO0171H Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Paritosh Jain, Adv. Revenue by Shri Robin Rawal, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 09.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement 09.09.2026
ORDER Per Renu Jauhri, Accountant Member:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.03.2026 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi-110055 [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)] arising out of the assessment order dated 31.03.2022 passed under section 263/153A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by DCIT, Central Circle-29, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’) pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 1
ITA No.- 6050/Del/2026 Omaxe Ltd. . 2. At the outset, Ld. AR submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) has been passed exparte, as the assessee was not able to make requisite compliance before him. He has, therefore, requested that the impugned order may be set aside and the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT(A).
On the other hand, Ld. DR has not objected to the said proposition.
After hearing both the parties, in the interest of justice, we hereby restore the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to make requisite compliance during the appellate proceedings.
In the result, appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 09.09.2026
Sd/- Sd/- [VIMAL KUMAR] [RENU JAUHRI] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated- 10.09.2026. Pooja. Copy forwarded to: 1. Assessee 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi, 2
More judgments on Section 263
- Gillette India Limited, Mumbai vs Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, JaipurITA 1316/JPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Structo Construction P. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs The Pr. CIT- 3, AhmedabadITA 1216/AHD/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Ritik vs. State Of M.P.Madhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026