What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits, granting the assessee another opportunity to present its case after the ex parte order.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte due to non-compliance with a single hearing notice. The assessee, now represented, claims no further notices were issued.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Adarsha Wines vs ITO | s.250 | ITAT Bangalore 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Appellant: Ms. Tanmayee, AR, Shri. Balusamy. H, JCIT

PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER 1. The assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 13.11.2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“learned CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2020-21.

We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the learned CIT(A) has passed Page 1 of 3

ITA No.:86/Bang/2026

the order ex parte due to non-compliance with the hearing notice on behalf of the assessee. Now, in the appeal before us, the assessee is duly represented by the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”) and wishes to pursue the litigation against the addition made by the Assessing Officer. During the hearing, the learned AR submitted that the learned CIT(A) issued only one notice of hearing on 24.09.2025, seeking a response from the assessee on or before 09.10.2025. The learned AR submitted that after this, no other notice was issued by the learned CIT(A), and the assessee’s appeal was dismissed vide impugned order dated 13.11.2025.

In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the assessee be granted one more opportunity to represent its case on merits before the learned CIT(A). Consequently, the appeal is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of the appeals on merits after consideration of all the details/submissions as may be filed by the assessee. Needless to mention, no order shall be passed without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Further, assessee is directed to appear before the learned CIT(A) on all dates of hearing as may be fixed without any default. As the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, the other grievances raised by the assessee in the present appeal do not call for adjudication at that stage. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Page 2 of 3

ITA No.:86/Bang/2026

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 10th July, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Bangalore,

Dated, the 10th July, 2026.

*VM* Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. CIT(A)

By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT,Bangalore

Page 3 of 3

ADARSHA WINES,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 7(2)(3), BANGALORE

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