CONTINENTAL CONSTRUCTION LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 6(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8689/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 July 2026AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering that the AO's order was ex-parte and confirmed by the CIT(A), the Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, ensuring natural justice and an adequate opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an ex-parte order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 147 read with Section 144, which was confirmed by the Commissioner Appeals. The assessee raised several grounds, including issues with the ex-parte assessment, denial of expenses, and charges of interest and penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice. The validity of additions, disallowance of expenses, and initiation of interest and penalty proceedings were also contested.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 271(1)(b),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI KRIWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 09.07.2026Pronounced: 09.07.2026

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

ITA No.8689/Del/2025 [Assessment Year: 2014-15] Continental Construction vs ITO Ltd. 28-29, Continental Ward- 6 (1) House, Nehru Place Delhi New Delhi -110019 PAN No.AAACC2309R Appellant Respondent Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Sudip Majumdar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement 09.07.2026 ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY A.M. Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 27.06.2024 passed by the NFAC, Delhi for the A.Y. 2014-15. Grounds of appeal are as under :-

1.

The Ld. Commissioner Appeals erred in upholding the exparte order passed by the assessing officer under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act

2.

The Ld. commissioner erred in not considering the ground raised by the appellant regarding assessment of income from business at 10 percent of receipts recorded in Form 26AS when the appellant had no income from operations. 3. The Id commissioner of appeals erred in not considering the appellant's claim of expenses incurred for maintaining office, fighting legal cases and other related expenses incurred by the appellant to the tune of Rs 63506264 as they have to be incurred irrespective of the fact whether there is income from operations or not. 4. The Ld commissioner of appeals erred in dismissing the appellant's contention regarding charge of interest u/s 234A 5. The Ld commissioner of appeals erred in dismissing the appellant's contention regarding charge of interest u/s 2348 6. The Ld. Commissioner has erred in confirming the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act 7. The Ld. Commissioner has erred in confirming the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act 8. The above grounds are independent and without prejudice to each other

2.

The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is reproduced as under :-

3.

Having considered the issues brought in the application for condonation of delay. We are inclined to condone the delay. Ld. DR did not object on this issue.

4.

At the very outset the Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought it to the notice of the Bench that the order passed by the AO in this case is u/s.144 i.e. exparte r.w.s. 147 of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the exparte order passed by the ld. AO. Accordingly, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed before the Bench that in order to have natural justice to the assessee the matter may be remanded back to the file of the AO.

5.

Per contra the Ld. DR relied and supported the orders of the authorities below.

6.

We have considered the findings given by the AO in the assessment order passed exparte u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. We have also considered the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the order passed by the AO in this case is an exparte order and the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed all the additions made by the AO in his assessment order passed u/s.144 of the Act. Keeping in view the element of natural justice to the assessee we are inclined to remand this case back to the file of the AO for passing denovo order after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee as required by law.

7.

The assessee is also directed to comply notices and queries of the AO and file all required documents and submissions in order to help in finalizing the assessment order. Accordingly, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 09.07.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] [KRINWANT SAHAY] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANTMEMBER Dated: 09.07.2026 NEHA , Sr.P.S.* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. PCIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →