M/S KAVISH IMPEX PRIAVATE LIMITED,HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD 14(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1004/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 July 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the interest of justice and the principle of natural justice, decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A). This was despite the assessee's non-compliance with the notices issued by the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which affirmed an addition of Rs. 2,29,93,000/- made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee's counsel pointed out that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order, passed due to non-compliance with notices, should be set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh hearing to ensure natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ NEW DELHI

Before: SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SH. KRINWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 16.07.2026Pronounced: 16.07.2026

1 . IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘H’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No.1004/DEL/2026 (A.Y 2017-18) M/s. Kavish Impex P. ITO Ltd., H. NO. 4165, 3rd Vs. Ward- 14 (1) Floor, Aradhya Homes, Delhi Ansal Versalia Sector- 67A, Gurgaon -122001 Haryana PAN No.AADCK4181C Appellant None Respondent Ms. Priyanka Durbey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 16.07.2026

ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY AM

Appeal in this case has been filed by the revenue against the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi for the A.Y. 2017-18. Grounds of appeal are as under :-

2 . “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in affirming the addition of Rs. 2,29,93,000/- made by the Assessing Officer in the hands of the appellant, which is erroneous, contrary to law, and liable to be deleted.

2.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 2,29,93,000/- under section 69A of the Act. which was made on the basis of preconceived notions, assumptions and presumptions, rendering the addition invalid and bad in law.

3.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. even though the impugned amount was duly recorded and explained. Therefore, the invocation of section 69A is bad in law.

4.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order.

5.

That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing.”

2.

At the very outset the Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought it to the notice of the Bench that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an exparte order as assessee could not comply the notices issued by them and, therefore, he made prayer before the Bench that in order to give natural justice to the assessee the matter may be remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

3.

Per contra the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

3 .

4.

We have considered the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate order. We find that the assessee has not complied with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) though adjournment was sought on two occasions, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an exparte order. In the interest of justice, although the assessee has not been complied notices, however, keeping in view the prayer of the assessee and element of natural justice we are inclined to remand this matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, this case is remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open Court on 16.07.2026.

.

Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (KRINWANT SAHAY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBR Dated :16/07/2026 *Neha Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →