AMIT PANCHAMIA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 34(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1441/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 July 2026AY 2017-20183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and that not all grounds of appeal were decided on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against an assessment order was dismissed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that both the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were ex-parte and that the CIT(A) failed to decide all grounds of appeal, violating natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and if all grounds of appeal were decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Agarwal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar Barua, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.07.2026Pronounced: 24.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1441/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Amit Panchamia Vs. ITO Ward-34(1), Kolkata C/o Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [PAN: AJXPP7581K] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Subhash Agarwal, AR Respondent by : Shri Ajit Kumar Barua, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 21.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 24.07.2026 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 26.02.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2017-18

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 147 of the Act on 10.09.2021 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 10.09.2021, Assessee filed an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide Order dated

ITA No.1441/Kol/2026 Amit Panchamia; A.Y: 2017-18 26.02.2026, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 26.02.2026, Assessee filed the present Appeal.

3.

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.

4.

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.

5.

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

ITA No.1441/Kol/2026 Amit Panchamia; A.Y: 2017-18 Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the 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.

6.

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 24.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24.07.2026 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

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →