What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's plea of a communication gap and the need for a fresh assessment. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment after providing an opportunity to be heard.

The assessee failed to comply with notices, leading to an ex-parte assessment order. The CIT(A) also confirmed the additions due to non-attendance. The assessee claimed a communication gap with their consultant.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard and if the additions made were justified on merits.

Ganpati Developers, Saharanpur vs DCIT | ITAT Dehradun 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB” DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, Adv

For Respondent: Shri S.K. Chaterjee, CIT DR

Hearing: 22.07.2026

ITA No.310/DDN/2026 GANPATI DEVELOPERS

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH “DB” DEHRADUN BEFORE SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.310/DDN/2026 Assessment Year: 2019-20 GANPATI DEVELOPERS, Vs. DCIT, F-42, Church Compound, Bajoria Marg, Central Circle, Saharanpur, Utter Pradesh 247001. Dehradun, Uttarakhand. PAN No.AAJFG3397F Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Anil Jain, Adv. Revenue by Shri S.K. Chaterjee, CIT DR Date of hearing: 22.07.2026 Pronouncement on 22.07.2026 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. The present appeal arises from order dated 01.04.2026, passed by Ld. CIT(A)-3, Noida u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”).

1.1 In this case, the Ld. AO is seen to have passed an order u/s 144 of the Act considering that there was no compliance by the assessee.

1.2 The aggrieved assessee approached the CIT(A) where also due to non-attendance before the first appellate authority, the action of Ld. AO in making several enhancements to the returned income of the assessee, was confirmed.

ITA No.310/DDN/2026 GANPATI DEVELOPERS 1.3 The assessee has now approached the ITAT with grounds challenging the denial of opportunity and also the addition on merits.

Before us the Ld. AR pleaded that due to a communication gap between the assessee and his tax consultant the assessee was not made aware of the proceedings in time. However, the assessee now undertakes to comply with any notice issued by the authorities below in case the Tribunal could consider remanding the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment.

2.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

We have considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. It is seen that the issues in appeal are basically factual in nature and hence, we are constrained to accept the request of the assessee and set aside the impugned order. Thereafter, we deem it fit to remit this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 22.07.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 11.08.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S.

ITA No.310/DDN/2026 GANPATI DEVELOPERS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

GANPATI DEVELOPERS ,SAHARANPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , DEGRADUN

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