What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) in the interest of justice. The case was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

The assessee, SAV DHARAM FOODS LLP, failed to attend proceedings before the CIT(A) due to a communication gap with their tax consultant. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. The assessee requested a chance to present their case and for the matter to be remanded.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case.

Sav Dharam Foods LLP vs Assessment Unit | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Shri Madhav Gawri, Adv

For Respondent: Shri Balkrishan Gopal, Sr. DR

Hearing: 13.07.2026

ITA No.1808/DEL/2026 SAV DHARAM FOODS LLP IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1808/DEL/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24 SAV DHARAM FOODS LLP, Vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, H.No.1603, Block D, CIT(A) NFAC, Narela, North West Delhi, C.R. Building, Delhi 110040. Delhi 110003. PAN No. AEFFS3477L Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Madhav Gawri, Adv. Revenue by Shri Balkrishan Gopal, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 13.07.2026 Pronouncement on 15.07.2026 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal arises from order dated 15.12.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by NFAC, Delhi.

In this case, right at the outset, the Ld. AR prayed for considering the fact that due to a communication gap between the tax consultant and the assessee, proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) could not be attended to and the fact of non-compliance is duly mentioned in paragraph 6 at pages 5 to 6 of the impugned order. It was averred that the assessee was not made aware of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and only for the notice issued on 13.11.2025 did the assessee move for an adjournment. It was requested that the assessee may be given another 1

ITA No.1808/DEL/2026 SAV DHARAM FOODS LLP chance to present the facts before the Ld. CIT(A) and for that matter the issue could be remanded back to him.

2.1 The Ld. DR supported the orders of Ld. CIT(A) and stated that the facts on record had been duly considered while passing the order.

We have considered the facts before us the documents and have heard the Ld. AR/DR. It is felt that this is a fact-based case where the authorities below have to clearly bring out the factual aspects. It is seen that due to the non-attendance before the Ld. CIT(A) by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order. In the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order and remand the same back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. While the Ld. CIT(A) would give adequate opportunity of being heard, the assessee would do well to avail of such opportunities.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 15.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated:15.07.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S.

ITA No.1808/DEL/2026 SAV DHARAM FOODS LLP Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

SAV DHARAM FOODS LLP,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, DELHI

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