AAS MOHAMMAD,HAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3)(4), HAPUR, UTTAR PRADESH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the NFAC passed ex-parte orders without independent findings. Therefore, to ensure justice and fair play, the appeals were restored to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against ex-parte orders passed by the NFAC for AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15. The NFAC had decided the issues without adjudicating on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC was justified in passing ex-parte orders without considering the merits of the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 33 & 34/Del/2026 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Aas Mohammad, Vs. ITO, 380, Avas Vikas Colony, Ward-2(3)(4), Bulandsahar Road, Hapur Hapur (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AUKPM8190P Assessee by : Shri S. K. Chaturvedi, CA Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13/05/2026 Date of pronouncement 13/05/2026
O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeals in ITA Nos. 33 & 34/Del/2026 for AYs 2013-14 & 2014- 15, arises out of the order of the ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 14.07.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147/144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 26.03.2022 and 27.03.2022 by the Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).
The preliminary issue to be decided in these appeals is as to whether the Learned NFAC was justified in passing an exparte order in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Further, on going through the grounds raised by the assessee and the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), we
ITA Nos. 33 & 34/Del/2026 Aas Mohammad
find that the ld NFAC had decided the issue ex parte without adjudicating the issue on merits giving its independent finding. Hence, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit and appropriate to restore these appeals to the file of ld NFAC for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld NFAC for expeditious disposal of the appeals by not taking unwarranted adjournments. Hence, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13/05/2026.
-Sd/- -Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13/05/2026 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- 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
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026