ALPANA JAIN,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3310/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 July 2026AY 2022-233 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and that the assessee did not make the required compliance. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after providing the assessee with an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee argued that they were prevented by sufficient cause and did not get a proper opportunity to present their case. The assessment itself was of a high pitch, with additions significantly exceeding declared income.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without adjudicating the grounds and whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, A : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, A.R. and Shri Govind Agarwal, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT-D.R
Hearing: 21.07.2026Pronounced: 21.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES, A : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3310/Del/2026 Assessment Year : 2022-23 Alpana Jain Vs ITO Ch. No.206-207, Ansal Satyam Ward – 2(1)(1), RDC, Rajnagar, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh – 201 002 PAN: BPOPJ 4812 D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, A.R. and Shri Govind Agarwal, Adv Revenue by : Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT-D.R. Date of Hearing : 21.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 21.07.2026 ORDER PER RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.01.2026 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] arising out of the Assessment Order dated 25.03.2024 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, NFAC (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’) pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2022-23.

ITA No.3310/Del/2026 Alpana Jain vs ITO 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “Because, order of Ld. CIT (Appeals) is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Because, Ld. CIT (Appeals) grossly erred in passing ex-party order without even adjudicating any of the grounds raised vis a vis facts given in appeal, therefore order is beyond the provisions of section 250(6)/250(4) of Act, as held in CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas (HUF) [2016] 240 Taxman 133/69 taxmann.com 407 (Bom.) etc. 3. Because, Id. CIT (Appeals) inherently wrong in dismissing the appeal in limine as appellant was prevented with sufficient cause to respond on the last date of hearing and Id. Lower Authority hurriedly dismissed appeal ex-party in short inning of three dates, thus assessee could not get proper opportunity to present his case before any of the authorities below. 4. Because, Id. CIT(A) further erred even not appreciating the fact that on one hand huge purchases are disallowed but simultaneously huge creditors are rejected thus additions may amount to double taxation and are made without any application of mind which is against the very tenets of juris. 5. Because, Id. CIT(A) further failed to appreciate that the case is of high pitch assessment, whereby assessment is made around 140 times of declared income which itself is impossibility more so when assessee has disclosed purchases duly supported with e-way bill/transporter details on which even credit is taken and there is no adverse information thus addition is without due application of mind/ without proper opportunity. 6. The Appellant crave leave to add, amend, alter and/or modify the grounds with the leave of the Hon'ble Court. Therefore, it is very respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the orders of Id. lower authorities with the directions as deemed fit.”

3.

We have heard the rival submissions. It is seen that the order of the CIT(A) is ex parte as the assessee did not make any compliance to the notices issued during the appellate proceedings. Accordingly, in the interest of justice we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving due

ITA No.3310/Del/2026 Alpana Jain vs ITO opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and make requisite compliance before Ld. CIT(A). 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 21.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (RENU JAUHRI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 24.07.2026. Priti Yadav, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →