S.D. ENTERPRISES,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 47(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and not all grounds of appeal were decided on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal against an ex-parte assessment order was dismissed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that the CIT(A)'s order was also ex-parte and violated principles of natural justice as not all grounds were decided.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) order was passed in violation of natural justice and if all grounds of appeal were decided on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1603/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2019-20
S.D. Enterprises Vs. ITO Ward-47(1), Kolkata 9/1, Nutanpura, Road, Liluah, Howrah, West Bengal-711204 [PAN: ACYFS4954M] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Miraj D Shah, AR Respondent by : Shri Ambrish Mishra, DR Date of hearing : 04.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 05.08.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 23.01.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2019-20.
Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 15.03.2024 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 15.03.2024, Assessee filed an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide Order dated 23.01.2026, dismissed the Appeal of the
ITA No.1603/Kol/2026 S.D Enterprises; A.Y: 2019-20 Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 23.01.2026, Assessee filed the present Appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.
The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law, which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in the proceedings and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. Further, we observe that even before the Assessing Officer, the Assessee made only part compliance. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the
ITA No.1603/Kol/2026 S.D Enterprises; A.Y: 2019-20 Assessing Officer shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.
In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 05.08.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (GOPALAN GURUSAMY) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 05.08.2026 DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY//
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA
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 →- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026