What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte and acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A), affirming the Assessing Officer's additions. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT, and the Revenue argued in support of the CIT(A)'s findings.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in proceeding ex-parte against the assessee without proper opportunity, and if the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Harish Jhamb vs Income Tax Office 44 8 | ITAT Delhi 2026

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 03.06.2026Pronounced: 03.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4084/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Harish Jhamb, Vs. Income Tax Officer, H. No. 26A, GF BG-5A, Ward-44(8), LIG Flats, Paschim Vihar, Delhi New Delhi PAN: AIWPJ5677N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 03.06.2026 Date of pronouncement 03.06.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A), Aurangabad’s order dated 27.02.2026 having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1086648402(1), involving proceedings under section 144 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.4084/Del/2026

2 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. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

2 | P a g e

ITA No.4084/Del/2026

Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd June, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 8th July, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

HARISH JHAMB,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE 44 8, 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