ANDHRA ASSOCIATION,KADMA vs. EXEMPTION WARD, OFFICE ROAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The penalty levied under Section 270A was deleted as it was based on the quantum proceedings which were set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals were filed against ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee undertook to comply with all future notices if the matter was restored.
What were the issues?
Whether ex-parte orders passed due to non-compliance with notices should be set aside and restored to the AO. Whether a penalty under Section 270A can sustain if the underlying quantum proceedings are set aside.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
Per Bench
ITA No.57/Ran/2026 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 6.1.2026 in Appeal No.NFAC/17-18/10084320 for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Shri Sharwan Kumar Jha , ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri H.Robindro Singh, ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue.
P a g e 1 | 4
ITA Nos.57 & 58/RAN/2026 Assessment Year:2018-19
At the outset, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte without proper hearing to the assessee. He also submitted that the assessment order has also been passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act as the assessee has not responded to the sho
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Highways, Bidanasi vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pradeep Kumar Behera vs. Superintendent CGST And Central Excise., CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Manas Behera vs. Commissioner, CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Pramod Kumar Nayak vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, KendraparaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026