LEMON CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 13(1), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the case was decided ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the AO for a decision on merits after providing a hearing opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-response to notices and failure to produce evidence before the AO and CIT(A). The assessee requested another opportunity to present its case.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deciding the appeal ex-parte without affording a proper opportunity to the assessee, and if the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 13.08.2025 for the AY 2017-18.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeal has been decided by the ld. CIT (A) ex-parte when the assessee failed to respond to various notices issued during the appellate proceedings. The ld. CIT (A) decided the appeal
We, after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, find that apparently the case was decided ex-parte by the ld. CIT (A). We note that despite numerous notices, none responded and made compliances before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) passed an ex-parte order in limine. We also note that the details and evidences were also not filed before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, this appeal is restored to the file of the learned AO with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It is further clarified that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise required for valid and reasonable cause. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 10.07.2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 10.07.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy//
Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026