What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the ex-parte quantum assessment order was not on merits and directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeals afresh. The penalty appeal was also set aside for fresh disposal, with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

The assessee's appeals were against orders passed by the CIT(A) concerning assessment orders under Section 143(3) and 272A(1) for AY 2022-23. The original assessment order was ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment order was justified and if the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity to present their case before the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3), Section 144, Section 250, Section 272A(1)

Sanjay Jindal vs ITO | s.143(3) | ITAT Delhi 2026

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

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMANAND

For Appellant: Shri Chandresh Gupta, CA

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr

Hearing: 09/07/2026Pronounced: 09/07/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND

MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 2111/Del/2026 (A.Y 2022-23) ITA No. 2112/Del/2026 (A.Y 2022-23)

Sanjay Jindal Vs. Income Tax Officer, 43B, Block FP, NR ND Ward-70(1), MCD Civic Market, Rani Bagh, Centre Minto Road, Saraswati Vihar, North West SKD Basti, Press Delhi, New Delhi Enclave, Ajmeri Gate, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AHVPJ0184E Assessee by : Shri Chandresh Gupta, CA Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09/07/2026 Date of pronouncement 09/07/2026 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J. M.: Both the Appeals filed by the assessee aredirected against the

orders passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),

National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed under Section

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, both dated 16.12.2025 arising out of

the assessment orders under Section 143(3) and 272A(1) of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for

Assessment Year 2022-23.

2 ITA Nos. 2111 & 2112/Del/2026 Sanjay Jindal Vs. ITO 2. Having regard to the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. AO in

quantum matter under Section 144 of the Act which was further

confirmed by the First Appellate Authority and since the quantum

matter decidedby the Ld. A.O. is found to be not on merits and thus in

our considered opinion in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice,

the assessee may be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard to

represent its case before the Ld. CIT(A) afresh. Thus, the appeal is

disposed of by remitting the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for

deciding the same afresh and consequently the penalty appeal is also

set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for disposal afresh. The Ld. CIT(A) is

further directed to grant an opportunity of being heard to the assessee

and to dispose of appeals by passing reasoned orders upon

considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the

assessee may choose made just to file at the time of hearing of both

the appeals.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 05/08/2026 P.K/R. Naheed, Sr PS

3 ITA Nos. 2111 & 2112/Del/2026 Sanjay Jindal Vs. ITO

SANJAY JINDAL,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 70(1), CIVIC CENTRE

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