VIKRAM SINGH,GURGAON vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 3(1), GURGAON
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity to make submissions. The assessee undertook to update their contact details for proper notice service.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an agriculturist, claims that notices from the CIT(A) were not served, preventing proper submissions. The assessee also stated that counsel representation was inadequate during assessment proceedings.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified due to non-service of notices and inadequate representation during assessment proceedings.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY&
PER SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against ex-parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 06.02.2026, for AY 2020-21.
Shri Charitra Gupta, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee is an agriculturist. The notices issued by the CIT(A) were not served upon the assessee, therefore, the assessee was unable to make submissions before the CIT(A). He further submitted that the assessee could not make proper submissions before the Assessing Officer (AO) as the assessee was not properly represented by the counsel during assessment proceedings. The ld. AR, thus, prayed for restoring the matter to the file of AO.
ITA 3990/DEL/2026 VIKRAM SINGH 3. Per contra, Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, representing the department defending the impugned order prayed for dismissing appeal of the assessee. The ld. DR submits despite repeated notices, the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by the CIT(A).
Both sides heard. Considering entire facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore this matter to the AO for denovo assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
The ld. AR of the assessee undertakes to update email address and residential address of the assessee on portal of the Department within 30 days from the date of this order for proper service of notice. The AO shall issue notice to the assessee on the email address as updated by the assessee on the official portal of the Department.
The assessee shall respond to the notice(s) served by the AO, without fail.
In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on Tuesday the 04th day of August, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- AMITABH SHUKLA VIKAS AWASTHY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Delhi Dated: 07 -August-2026
ITA 3990/DEL/2026 VIKRAM SINGH Copy to: VIKRAM SINGH 1 H.NO.65, DHANA, GURGAON, HARYANA 122001 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1), HSIIDC BUILDING, VANIJYA NIKUNJ, UDHYOG VIHAR, PHASE-V, 2 GURGAON, HARYANA 122001 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, DELHI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026