What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be allowed an opportunity to make submissions before the CIT(A). However, due to the assessee's casual and negligent conduct, a cost of Rs. 10,000 per appeal was imposed.

The assessee's appeals for assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16 were dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-filing of paper books and submissions, despite multiple adjournments. The assessee claimed they were under the impression that appeals would be heard after related earlier years' appeals were concluded.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals ex-parte without affording a proper opportunity to the assessee to make submissions, and whether costs should be imposed on the assessee for non-compliance.

Zte Telecom India Private… vs ACIT | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY

For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR) &

PER SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These four appeals by the assessee are directed against ex-parte orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- Delhi-44, (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)'), for assessment years 2012-13 to 2015-16, respectively. All the impugned orders are of even date i.e. 20.02.2026.

Shri S.S Tomar, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that six appeals of the assessee staring from AY 2010-11 to AY 2015-16 were bunched together for hearing before the CIT(A). The assessee has been making submissions in appeals for AY 2010-11 and 2012- 13, necessary paper books for adjudication of appeal for above mentioned two assessment years were duly filed before the CIT(A) along with the submissions. The appeal for AY 2010-11 and 1

ITA 2348 to 2351/DEL/2026 ZTE TELECOM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 2011-12 are still pending before the CIT(A) for final disposal. The CIT(A) in ex-parte proceedings, upholding the assessment order dismissed appeals of the assessee for subsequent assessment years i.e. AY 2012-13 to 2015-16 in identical manner with verbatim findings. The ld. Counsel further pointed that the dates mentioned in the impugned order regarding hearing of appeals are the dates on which the appeals of assessee for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 were fixed for hearing. The assessee was under bonafide impression that after conclusion of hearing of appeals for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12, the appeals for subsequent assessment years will be taken up for hearing.

Per contra, Shri Mahesh Kumar, representing the department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing appeals of the assessee. The ld. DR submitted that a perusal of the impugned order shows that as many as sixteen opportunities were garneted to the assessee but no submissions were made by the assessee. In fact, the assessee has time and again sought adjournment taking a consistent plea of collating document for submissions of paper book.

Both sides heard. Orders of the CIT(A) for AYs 2012-13 to 2015-16 examined. The CIT(A) has dismissed appeals in ex-parte proceedings in an identical manner. A perusal of the impugned orders reveals that the assessee had been seeking repeated adjournments to file paper book. Since, no paper book was filed by the assessee, the CIT(A) dismissed appeals of assessee confirming additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO).

4.1. Considering entire facts of the case, we are of considered view that in the interest of justice opportunity should be allowed to the assessee for making submissions before the First Appellate Authority. Nevertheless, the assessee has also taken proceedings before the CIT(A) in a casual manner. Despite repeated adjournments the assessee failed to furnish paper book and make submissions before the First Appellate Authority. For the callous and negligent conduct of the assessee, cost of Rs.10,000/- per appeal is imposed on the assessee/appellant. The assessee shall deposit the cost in accordance with Rule 32A(2) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal Rules), 1963 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Upon furnishing proof of deposit of cost, the CIT(A) shall take up the appeals for adjudication. The CIT(A) shall decide the appeals on merit after affording opportunity of making submission to the assessee, in accordance with law.

ITA 2348 to 2351/DEL/2026 ZTE TELECOM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED 5. In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose, subject to cost as aforesaid.

Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday the 22nd day of July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- AMITABH SHUKLA VIKAS AWASTHY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Delhi Dated: 24-July-2026 NV/-

ITA 2348 to 2351/DEL/2026 ZTE TELECOM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Copy to: ZTE TELECOM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, 8TH FLOOR, TOWER - D, GLOBAL BUSINESS PARK, MEHRAULI GURGAON 1 ROAD, SIKANDARPUR, GURGAON-122002, HARYANA THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1), GURGAON, 2 CIRCLE 4(1), GURGAON, HSIDC BUILDING, PHASE - 5, UDYOG VIHAR, GURGAON-122001, HARYANA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, DELHI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

ZTE TELECOM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4(1), GURGAON, GURGAON

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments