SPICE HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE 20, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) to prevent miscarriage of justice. The assessee is to be granted a further opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The Revenue filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee was not given an opportunity to be heard before the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.2173/Del/2026 (A.Y 2022-23) Spice Healthcare Private Vs. The Assistant Limited B1, Kalindi Colony, Commissioner of Income New Delhi Tax, Central Circle 20, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: ABACS2839R Assessee by : Rishabh Jain, Adv Revenue by: Shri Om Prakash, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 15/07/2026 Date of pronouncement 15/07/2026
O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J. M.: The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the
order dated 30.12.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-
tax (Appeals)-27, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] under
Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 04.03.2025 passed by
the Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department (hereinafter referred to
as ‘the ld. AO’) under Section 147r.w. Section 143(3) of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) for Assessment Year 2022-23.
2 ITA No. 2173/Del/2026 Spice Healthcare 3. As it appears that admittedly the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an
ex-parte order in order to prevent the mis-carriage of justice, we
set aside the issue to the file of the CIT(A) for grant a further
opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Assessee is,
thus, set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
The Ld. CIT(A) is further directed to providean opportunity
of being heard to the assessee while considering the case made
out by the assessee and to finalize the issue by passing a
reasoned order upon considering the evidence on record or any
other evidence which the assessee may chose to file at the time of
hearing of the matter.
In the result, the Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for
statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15/07/2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (RENU JAUHRI) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 15/07/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS
3 ITA No. 2173/Del/2026 Spice Healthcare
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026