What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the CIT(A)'s order to be ex-parte and non-speaking, violating principles of natural justice. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A). The assessee contended they did not get a proper opportunity to represent their case and wished to submit additional evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice, and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present additional evidence.

R.K.Trading Co. vs DCIT | ITAT Indore 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

For Appellant: CA Sh. Kailash Agrawal

Hearing: 19/06/2026Pronounced: 31/07/2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, इ�दौर �यायपीठ, इ�दौर । In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member And Shri Paresh M. Joshi Judicial Member आयकरअपील सं. /ITA No. 261/Ind/2026 [ िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year : 2017-18 ] R. K. Trading CO., DCIT-1(1), Indore 33, Barwani Plaza, 12, Old Vs. Aaykar, Bhawan, Indore, Palasia, Indore, Indore Madhya Pradesh-452001 Madhya Pradesh-452001 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AACFR0554J (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) िनधा�रती की ओर से/Assessee by : CA Sh. Kailash Agrawal राज�की ओर से / Revenue by : Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख /Date of Hearing : 19/06/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 31/07/2026

:: आदेश/ORDER :: Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 13.01.2026, which in turn arises out of an assessment order dated 24.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18.

At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of

ITA No. 261/Ind/2026 [ AY 2017-18 ] R.K. Trading Co. v. DCIT

principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel submitted that assessee wants to submit additional documents and evidences before the Assessing Officer to prove his claim, therefore matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the assessing officer may be granted to the assessee.

On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue did not raise any objection if the matter is restored back to the file of the assessing officer.

We have heard, both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex-parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. We note that assessee wants to submit additional documents and evidences before the Assessing Officer to prove his claim. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the Ld. CIT(A). We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity

Page 2 of 3

ITA No. 261/Ind/2026 [ AY 2017-18 ] R.K. Trading Co. v. DCIT

of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. We hold and direct accordingly. The assessing officer will afford opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in further evidence to substantiate its case. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the assessing officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Order pronounced in the open Court on 31/07/2026. Sd/- Sd/- [ Shri Paresh M. Joshi ] [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] �ाियक सद�/ Judicial Member लेखा सद�/Accountant Member

इ�ौर / Indore िदनांक/ Date: 31 /07/2026 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Indore By Order 6. Guard File

Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot

Page 3 of 3

R.K.TRADING CO.,INDORE vs. DCIT-1(1), INDORE, INDORE

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