AMOGH YOG EVAM SWASTHAYA KALYAN SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,PANIPAT vs. CIT (E), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4337/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 June 2026AY 2024-253 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee's right to natural justice was violated. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 51 days, which the Tribunal condoned. The impugned order was passed ex-parte by the CIT(E) without providing adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) order passed ex-parte without affording adequate opportunity of hearing violates natural justice principles.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Pronounced: 29.06.2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, �द�ल� पीठ�, नई �द�ल� INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 4337/DEL/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2024-25) AMOGH YOG EVAM CIT (E) SWASTHAYA KALYAN ROOM NO 1 5TH FLOOR CR SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN BUILDING HIMALAYA MARG SEC 37 NEAR AMBAR TDI CITY SEC 17E Vs. KABRI ROAD, PANIPAT-132103, CHANDIGARH-, CHANDIGARH HARYANA अपीलाथ� Appellant ��थ� Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AAITA9213D

अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant represented by: None ��थ� �ारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Rajore Satish Chandra Ramsevak, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 24.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 29.06.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh, dated 22.01.2025 passed under section 12A of the Act. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

The assessee was called absent.

3.

At the outset, the Registry has identified the delay of 51 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation

ITA 4337/DEL/2026 AMOGH YOG EVAM SWASTHAYA KALYAN SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN petition attributing delay for 51 days to the circumstances beyond its control, we quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) to condone the delay.

4.

The ld. DR while relying upon the order of the lower authorities, took us through the factual matrix of the case. We have noted that the rights of natural justice of the assessee have been violated in as much as the impugned order u/s 12A dated 22.01.2025 has been passed without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. The fact of ex-parte order of CIT(E) is evident from the conclusion drawn by him in his order to reject assessee’s application on premise of non- submission of required documents. We are conscious that no litigant gains by non- prosecution of its case. In the interest of justice, we remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) for re-adjudication de novo, in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. The assessee shall be bounden to comply with all the statutory notices and any non-compliance would be adversely viewed. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29th June, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/-/-

[ANUBHAV SHARMA] [AMITABH SHUKLA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 29.06.2026 Shekhar

Page 2 of 3

ITA 4337/DEL/2026 AMOGH YOG EVAM SWASTHAYA KALYAN SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →