What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found that the lower authorities had passed ex parte orders and, in the interest of justice, restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity to be heard.

The assessee filed appeals with significant delays, which were condoned by the tribunal. The assessee's representative argued that ex parte orders were passed by the lower authorities, preventing proper representation.

What were the issues?

Whether ex parte orders passed by lower authorities warrant restoration of the case for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard.

Smt. Ranu Ghosh, Burdwan vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury and Shri

For Respondent: Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury, Sr. DR

Hearing: 17.08.2026Pronounced: 01.09.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.1712, 1713 & 1714/KOL/2026 Assessment Years: (2009-10, 2017-18 & 2018-19) Smt. Ranu Ghosh, ITO, Kantapukur, Laxmipur, Burdwan – Vs. Ward – 1(4), 713101, West Bengal Burdwan [PAN: ANZPG6797J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Soumitra Choudhury and Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocate(s) Respondent by: Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement 01.09.2026

O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

These three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate orders dated 22.05.2024, 26.09.2023 and 07.04.2025 by the learned Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-6, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the “ld. CIT(A)”) passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the different assessment years (A.Y.) 2009–10, 2017-18 and 2018-19 respectively.

At the outset, we observe that there is a delay of 645, 889 and 311 days in filing present appeals by the assessee. The assessee has

ITA Nos.1712, 1713 & 1714/Kol/2026/A.Y. 2009-10, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Smt. Ranu Ghosh vs. ITO filed affidavits explaining the reasons for delays. We have perused the affidavits and find that the reasons stated therein are reasonable and bonafide. Accordingly, we hereby condoned the delays in filing appeals and the same are admitted for adjudication. 3. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) submitted that both the lower authorities had passed ex parte orders. It was submitted that the assessee could not properly represent her case before either the authorities. The ld. AR, therefore, prayed that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer (In short, ‘the AO’) for fresh adjudication after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. The learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR), on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We note that the matter had been decided by the authorities below ex parte when the assessee did not respond to various opportunities, therefore, in the interests of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO is directed to adjudicate the issue afresh in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all requisite documents and evidences as may be called for by the AO

ITA Nos.1712, 1713 & 1714/Kol/2026/A.Y. 2009-10, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Smt. Ranu Ghosh vs. ITO 6. In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 01/09/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (Pradip Kumar Choubey) (Rajesh Kumar) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated: 01/09/2026 SAMANTA आदेश �ȧ ĤǓ�ͧ �ͪ �\ Ē ȯͪ��/Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. \ �Ȣ�ȡ�ȸ/ The Appellant 2. Ĥ×��ȸ/ The Respondent 3. Ȳ�Ȳͬ��आयकर] �ǕÈ�/ Concerned CIT 4. आयकर] �ǕÈ�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 5. ��ȡ�Ȣ�ĤǓ�Ǔ�ͬ �, आयकर\ �Ȣ�ȣ�\ͬ ��,/ DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. �ȡ�[ फाईल/ Guard file

BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Deputy Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata

SMT. RANU GHOSH,BURDWAN vs. ITO, WARD 1(4), NOW WARD 1(2), BURDWAN, BURDWAN

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments