What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged that the CIT(A) proceeded ex-parte and that communication gaps might have occurred. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12 was filed with a delay, which was condoned. The CIT(A)/NFAC had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, affirming the Assessing Officer's additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in proceeding ex-parte against the assessee without considering potential communication gaps.

Shweta Gupta vs Income Tax Officerward 34(1) Delhi | ITAT Delhi 2026

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 03.08.2026Pronounced: 03.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6447/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shweta Gupta, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-4/11, E-4 Block Model Ward 34(1), Town-II, Delhi- 09 I P Estate, New Delhi- 02 PAN: AHRPG4858N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 03.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 03.08.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (for short, “CIT(A)/NFAC”), Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1072562373(1), dated 27.01.2025 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 39 days in filing of the instant appeal is

condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

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

2 | P a g e

to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective 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 03.08.2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated:10.08.2026 Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

SHWETA GUPTA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERWARD 34(1) DELHI, 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