What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-response to multiple hearing notices. The assessee claims the non-compliance was not deliberate and requests an opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal was rightly dismissed for non-appearance, and if an opportunity for a fresh hearing should be granted.

Mr Neeraj Hans Raj Gulati vs DCIT | ITAT Pune 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Abhay A Avchat

For Respondent: Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar

Hearing: 25.03.2026Pronounced: 28.04.2026

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15 is directed against the order dated 20.03.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 30.12.2016 passed u/s.143(3) of the Act.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal on merits on account of non-responding to the notices of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A) on multiple occasions. He submitted that assessee has all necessary details in support of its grounds of appeal raised against the 2 Neeraj Hans Raj Gulati

additions made by ld. Assessing Officer and if an opportunity is granted then the assessee can furnish the details before ld.CIT(A).

On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A).

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and assessment for A.Y. 2013-14 has been completed u/s.143(3) on 30.12.2016 against the returned income of Rs.38,74,467/- filed in the return of income furnished on 14.11.2014. Ld. Assessing Officer has made various additions of Rs.39,25,000/- and assessed the income at Rs.77,99,467/-. Assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but on the various dates of hearing fixed on 21.01.2021, 12.02.2024, 21.05.2024, 19.06.2024, 15.07.2024 and 27.12.2024 assessee did not respond as a result of which ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal confirmed the additions made by ld. Assessing Officer.

Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to Ground No.6 has submitted that the assessee’s appeal has been dismissed without hearing and therefore prayer has been made to afford one more opportunity of hearing since non compliance by the assessee on the given dates is neither deliberate nor intentional. Ld. DR has not strongly objected to the contentions made by ld. Counsel for the assessee.

Considering the contentions raised by the assessee and the facts in the instant case, we deem it proper to restore the issues back to the file ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the issue, the issues raised in the instant appeal are being remitted to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the 3 Neeraj Hans Raj Gulati

set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update email and contact detail on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of the CIT(A)/NFAC are set aside and Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 28th day of April, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 28th April, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.04.28 17:59:52 +05'30'

4 Neeraj Hans Raj Gulati

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

2.3.

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

////

MR NEERAJ HANS RAJ GULATI,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE, 7, PUNE

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