ARCOTECH LTD,REWARI vs. ACIT CC-7, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without granting sufficient opportunity. Therefore, the case was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, with directions to provide three effective opportunities to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Arcotech Ltd., failed to file its return of income and was issued a notice under Section 148. The assessment was completed under Section 144/147/148, leading to an addition of Rs. 5,56,01,728/-. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-compliance with statutory requirements and lack of cooperation.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without granting effective opportunity, and whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and conducted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 144,Section 147,Section 148,Section 139(1),Section 249(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
This captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 22.01.2026 arising from the assessment order dated 26.12.2018 passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 3(1), New Delhi under Section 144/147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) concerning Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17. [A.Y 2016-17]
The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :
“1. That on the facts and in law, the impugned assessment order dated 26.12.2018 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Kalinga Paper Mart, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Kabita Nayak vs. Chief Commissioner, CGST, Central Excise And Customs, KhurdaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Swastika Ingot PVT.LTD, Sundargarh vs. The Addl Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Basudev Logistics, Jagatsinghpur vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026