What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that ex-parte proceedings could arise from communication gaps. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A)/NFAC, affirming the Assessing Officer's disallowances. The Revenue argued that the assessee provided no explanation or evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in proceeding ex-parte against the assessee without proper opportunity, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Arif Ali vs ITO | s.144 | ITAT Delhi 2026

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 19.08.2026Pronounced: 19.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 7473/Del/2026, A.Y. 2012-13 Vs. Arif Ali Income Tax Officer, C-76, Ward 61(3), Gali No. 1, New Delhi Chand Bagh Gokal Puri, East Delhi-110094 New Delhi PAN: AHZPA2337C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 19.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 19.08.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, 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/250/2026-27/1089737939(1), dated

ITA No. 7473/Del/2026

16.06.2026 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC in its detailed discussion has proceeded ex- parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.

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

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands and is of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer, auditor and the arguing counsel in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out.

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) for afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective

ITA No. 7473/Del/2026

opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the cases at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19/08/2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 10/09/2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

ARIF ALI,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 61(3), DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments