What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. This was done in the interest of justice, acknowledging potential communication gaps when an assessee proceeds ex-parte.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-21 was filed with a delay. The CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, affirming the Assessing Officer's additions. The Revenue argued that the assessee provided no explanation or evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in proceeding ex-parte without considering the assessee's potential inability to present their case, and if the appeal should be restored for a fresh hearing.

Shahid Khan, Rampur vs Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax… | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 09.07.2026Pronounced: 09.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.-6063/Del/2026 Assessment Year:-2020-21 Shahid Khan, Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax- Karim Bagh, Rahe Raza, Rampur, 1, Ayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Uttar Pradesh-244901. Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh-244001. PAN: ACYPK1475B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Nirmal Nangia, Sr. DR Date of hearing 09.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 09.07.2026 ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, [in short, the “Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s order dated 24.09.2025 having DIN & Order No.- ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081126754(1), involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

ITA No.- 6063/Del/2026 Shahid Khan 3. Delay of 179 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) in its detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.

The Revenue during the course of hearing vehemently argues in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting his case.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands and is of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer, auditor and the arguing counsel in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the cases at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 2

ITA No.- 6063/Del/2026 Shahid Khan 8. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09th July, 2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 17th July, 2026. Pooja. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

SHAHID KHAN,RAMPUR vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, MORADABAD

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