ARNAVI GREEN BUILDING MATERIALS PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) proceeded ex-parte and there was a possibility of communication gaps due to the new faceless hearing system. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2019-20 was filed against the CIT(A)'s order. The CIT(A)'s discussion proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, affirming the Assessing Officer's disallowances/additions.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal when proceedings were ex-parte and without proper points of determination. The possibility of communication gaps in the faceless assessment system.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, �द�ली अिधकरण �द�ली �द�ली पीठ� �द�ली पीठ� पीठ�, नई पीठ� नई नई �द�ली नई �द�ली �द�ली �द�ली INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.5324/DEL/2026 िनधा�रणवष�/AssessmentYear:2019-20) ARNAVI GREEN BUILDING ASSISTANT MATERIALS PVT. LTD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX D-49, MANSAROVAR PARK, Vs. SHAHDRA, DELHI-110032, CENTRAL CIRCLE 27, DELHI-110055, अपीलाथ�Appellant ��थ� Respondent Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AALCA6490N अपीलाथ��ारा/Appellant represented by: Sh. Alka Arren, CA ��थ��ारा/Respondentrepresented by: Sh. Nirmal Nangia, Sr.DR
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of conclusion of hearing: 07.07.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of pronouncement: 07.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019-20, arises against the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi’s, order in Appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-29, 10945/2018-19 dated 08.01.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
ITA 5324/DEL/2026 ARNAVI GREEN BUILDING MATERIALS PVT. LTD.
Delay of 42 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned
in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land
Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that
the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-
parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing
Officer’s action making the corresponding
disallowances/additions herein. Nor do we find any substantive
lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the
Act requiring the CIT(A)/NFAC to first frame points of
determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.
Learned senior departmental representative vehemently
argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding
that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence
supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to
be dismissed.
I have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing
rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A)
has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some
communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing
ITA 5324/DEL/2026 ARNAVI GREEN BUILDING MATERIALS PVT. LTD.
counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless
hearings, 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
to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication,
within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the
taxpayer shall plead and prove the case 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 7th July, 2026.
Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31st July, 2026. f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ
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 →- Shree Hanumant Steel Traders vs. Assistant CommissionerChhattisgarh · 1 Nov 2026
- V3 Enterprises PVT LTD vs. The State Of ApAndhra Pradesh · 1 Nov 2026
- Zenith Metaplast(P) Limited vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 1 Nov 2026
- Susmita Das vs. The Principal Commissioner CGST And Central Excise , Bhubaneswar Commissionerate,KhurdaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Saroj Kumar Mahanandia vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026