AMEREX (P) LTD ,DELHI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE- 31 , DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1387/Del/2026 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2022-23) Amerex Private Limited The ACIT, Central Circle31, 1/20, Asaf Ali Road ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Darya Ganj, Ajmeri Gate Extn. v. Extension, New Delhi- New Delhi-110002 110055 PAN-AANCA3310K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Advocate Ankit Kumar Department by Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 29.06.2026

ORDER PER RAMIT KOCHAR, AM: This appeal in ITA No. 1387/Del/2026 for Assessment Year: 2022-23 has arisen form the learned CIT(A) appellate order u/s 250 dated 09.12.2025 in DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1083459771(1), which in turn has arisen from the assessment order dated 17.03.2024 passed by the AO u/s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act”), for Assessment Year 2022-23 in DIN ITBA/AST/S/144/2023-24/1062799167(1). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income u/s 139 declaring income of Rs.34,48,566/- ,on 02.11.2022. The case was selected by Revenue for framing scrutiny assessment under CASS. The reasons for selection under scrutiny was that the assessee has made substantial purchases from such suppliers who are Non-Filer(s) as compared to turnover shown in GSTR 1 return. As per revenue there is a possibility that

2 ITA No.1387/Del/2026 Amerex Private Ltd. v. The ACIT

the assessee has booked bogus expenses in order to reduce its profit/taxable income. Therefore , the genuineness / correctness of expenses related with these entities was required to be verified. During the course of assessment proceedings , Statutory Notices were issued by the AO to the assessee u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the 1961 Act. The assessee was asked to file details as per questionnaire issued by the AO. SCN’s were also issued by the AO to the assessee. The details are recorded in assessment order at page 2. The assessee did not fully complied with the notices issued by the AO. The Notices u/s 133(6) were issued to the parties from whom the assessee made purchases. None of the parties replied to the notices issued by the AO u/s 133(6). Thus, the asseseee was non- cooperative during assessment proceedings, which led AO to pass an ex-parte assessment order, wherein additions to the tune of Rs.3,89,40,234/- were made to the income of the assessee by the AO. 3. Aggrieved , the assessee filed first appeal with ld. CIT(A) , who dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. The ld. CIT(A) claimed to have issued multiple notices to the assessee, but as per ld. CIT(A) the same were not responded by the assessee, which led to the dismissal of the appeal filed by the assessee mainly for the reasons that the assessee did not participated in the first appellate proceedings before ld. CIT(A), wherein the assessment order passed by the AO was upheld by ld. CIT(A).

3 ITA No.1387/Del/2026 Amerex Private Ltd. v. The ACIT

the assessee Shri Ankit Kumar, Advocate from the office of Mr. Gautam Jain , Advocate made statement before the Bench that if one more opportunity is provided to the assessee, then the assessee will file all relevant details before the authorities. The assessee has filed affidavit dated 22.06.2026 of Shri Suraj Singh S/o Mr. Duli Chand r/o B-104, Street 7, Ambika Vihar, Shiv Vihar, Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110994 to that effect. 4.2 The ld. Sr.-DR submitted that it is an ex-parte order passed by ld. CIT(A) as the assessee did not co-operated and did not filed any reply/response to the notice issued by ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that even at assessment stage, the assessee was non- coperative and did not filed reply/response to queries raised by the AO. It was submitted that even parties from whom the assessee made purchases remained non-compliant to notices issued u/s 133(6). 5. We have considered rival contentions and perused the material on record. We have observed that the assessee filed its return of income u/s 139 declaring income of Rs.34,48,566/- , on 02.11.2022. The case was selected by Revenue for framing scrutiny assessment under CASS. The reasons for selection was that the assessee has made substantial purchases from such suppliers who are Non-Filer(s) as compared to turnover shown in GSTR 1 return. As per revenue there is a possibility that the assessee has booked bogus expenses in order to reduce its profit/taxable income. Therefore , the genuineness / correctness of expenses related with these entities was required to be verified. During the course of assessment proceedings , Statutory Notices were issued by the AO to the assessee u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the 1961 Act. The assessee was asked to file details as per questionnaire issued by the AO. SCN’s were also issued by the AO to the assessee. The details are recorded in assessment order at page 2. The assessee did not fully complied with the notices issued by the AO. The Notices u/s 133(6) were issued to the parties from whom the assessee made purchases. None of the parties replied to the notices issued u/s 133(6). Thus, the asseseee was non-cooperative during assessment proceedings, which led AO to pass an ex-parte assessment order, wherein additions to the

4 ITA No.1387/Del/2026 Amerex Private Ltd. v. The ACIT

tune of Rs.3,89,40,234/-were made to the income of the assessee.The assessee being aggrieved filed first appeal with ld. CIT(A). During appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) has claimed to have issued multiple notices to the assessee. There was no response from the assessee, except on first two occasions when the assessee sought adjournment as claimed by the assesse. The assessee has claimed that it did not replied to the last two notices.The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the additions made by the AO vide assessment order . The reasons for non compliance is stated to be inadvertence of the accountant. It is observed that ld. CIT(A) has not made any independent enquiry as is contemplated u/s 250(4) before upholding assessment order. There is no mention in the appellate order that the ld. CIT(A) called for assessment records to independently verify the facts. No notice u/s 133(6) or summons u/s 131 were issued by ld. CIT(A) to the purchasing parties from whom the assessee has claimed to had made purchases which stood disallowed by the AO, in order to independently make enquiry and come to independent conclusion and to unravel truth. No summons u/s 131 were issued by ld. CIT(A) to Directors of the assessee company to enforce their attendance. Thus , there is no independent verification of facts nor there is independent application of mind by ld. CIT(A). The proceedings before ld. CIT(A) are merely extension of assessment proceedings. The ld.CIT(A) is required and obligated to pass appellate order in compliance with the provisions of section 250(6), as ld. CIT(A) is required to pass reasoned and speaking order on merits in accordance with law. Reference is drawn to provisions of Section 250(6), wherein ld. CIT(A) has to state point for determination, his decision and reasons thereof. The principles of natural justice are breached . The ld. CIT(A) is required to pass a reasoned and speaking order by giving his independent reasoning , as is required u/s 250(6) . We have observed that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has not decided the appeal on merits, and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex-parte without deciding the issues arising in the first appeal on merit in accordance with law by simply upholding the assessment order, mainly on the grounds of

5 ITA No.1387/Del/2026 Amerex Private Ltd. v. The ACIT

non-compliance by the assessee to the notices issued by ld. CIT(A). The appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) is a non speaking cryptic order passed ex-parte without deciding the issue arising in the appeal on merits. Even, there is no mention as to the date’s of issuance and service of the multiple notices claimed to have been effected by ld. CIT(A) on to the assessee. The appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) is not an ultimate final order, as it is subject to further appeal with ITAT u/s 253. The appellate order passed by ITAT is subject to further appeal before Hon’ble High Court u/s 260A. The judgment and order passed by Hon’ble High Court is also subject to challenge before Hon’ble Supreme Court. Thus, the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) is not an ultimate final order in the chain of judicial hierarchy as prescribed under statute, as it is subject to challenge before higher appellate authority. Thus, Reasons which weighed in the minds of the adjudicating authority while adjudicating appeal on merits of the issues are cardinal as the higher appellate authority can then adjudicate appeal on the issues arising in appeal before them, based on decision and reasoning of ld. CIT(A) in deciding the issues. If the ld. CIT(A) simply dismiss the appeal merely because the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by ld. CIT(A) ex-parte without adjudicating issues arising in the appeal on merits, such order is not sustainable in the eyes of law keeping in view provisions of Section 250(6) , and also higher appellate authorities will be deprived to see what weighed in the mind of the ld. CIT(A) while adjudicating appeal as it will be an order passed without reasoning on the issues on merits. The appellate order of the CIT(A) is clearly in violation of section 250(6) of the Act and liable to be set aside. Merely stating the assessment order passed by AO is upheld, and that the assessee has not submitted details/documents in response to notices is not sufficient.The ld. CIT(A) is not toothless as his powers are co-terminus with the powers of the AO, which even includes power of enhancement. It is equally true that the assessee also did not complied with the notices issued by ld. CIT(A) and did not file the requisite details/documents to support his contentions. Thus, the assessee is equally responsible for its woes as the assessee did not

6 ITA No.1387/Del/2026 Amerex Private Ltd. v. The ACIT

comply with the notices issued by the AO as well ld. CIT(A). Keeping in view the entire factual matrix as culled out above in this order, it will be fair to both the parties as well in the interest of justice, that the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(Appeals) be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication after giving proper opportunity of being heard to both the parties .The assessee is directed to comply with the notice issued by ld. CIT(Appeals) during the appellate proceedings in set aside remand proceedings, otherwise ld. CIT(A) shall be free to decide the appeal ex- parte on merits in accordance with law, after complying with provisions of Section 250(6). We clarify that we have not commented on merits of the issues. Thus, the appellate order passed by ld. CIT(A) is set aside and matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. We order accordingly.