What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessment orders were passed due to the assessee's failure to provide required details. To ensure justice, the Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and remitted the appeals back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after hearing the assessee.

The assessee filed appeals after a significant delay, which was condoned. The assessee's representative argued that the impugned orders were passed ex-parte without a proper hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities passed orders ex-parte without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Gaden Phelgay Ling Charitable… vs ITO | s.144 | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member ITA No 2104 & 2105/KOL/2026 Assessment Year- 2015-16 & 2020-21 Gaden Phelgay Ling Charitable Trust....................................................................Appellant C/0. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata- 700069 [PAN No. AABTG0492K] Vs. ITO, Ward 6(1)...........................................................,..……………....……….Respondent Kolkata- 700069 Appearances by: Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Ambrish Mishra, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing: August 17, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order: August 25 ,2026 ORDER Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member: These are the appeals filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.06.2025 and 10.09.2025 of the Office Of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed under Section 144 of the Assessment Year 2015-16 and 2020-21 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

In both the cases, issues are common and similar hence taken up together or disposal by taking 2104/2026as a lead case.

At the very outset, it appears from the report of the Registry that the appeal has been filed by the assessee after a delay of 275 days and 184 days

ITA No.2104 & 2105/Kol/2026 respectively. For this, the assessee has filed a petition to condone the delay. Going over the contents of the petition delay is hereby condoned in both the appeal.

The Ld. AR instead of arguing into the merit of the case has only prayed that in both the appeal order has been passed without hearing the assessee as it was an ex-party order hence appeal be remitted back to the file of the AO with a direction to pass a order after hearing the assessee and after proper verification of the documents.

Contrary to that Ld. DR did not raise any objection.

Upon hearing the submission of the counsel of the respective parties and on perusal of the impugned order, we find that assessment order was passed when assessee failed to upload the reply, details and documents as required to substantiate his claim. CIT(A) has also passed an order by holding that assessee failed to submit any written submission or reply in spite of issuance of several notices. Interest of justice demands to afford an opportunity to the assessee to place his case. Accordingly, by setting aside the order of the lower authorities, we are remitting the appeal of the assessee to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to pass order after affording an opportunity hear the assessee.Assessee is also directed to cooperate in the remand proceedings.

ITA No.2104 & 2105/Kol/2026 4. The issues are common and similar in other appeal bearing No. 2105/2026. So, the order passed shall apply as Mutatis Mutandis in appeal No. 2105/2026.

As a result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.

Kolkata, the 25th August , 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Pradip Kumar Choubey] Accountant Member Judicial Member

DC Dated: 25. 08.2026.

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order Deputy Registrar, Kolkata Benches

ITA No.2104 & 2105/Kol/2026

GADEN PHELGAY LING CHARITABLE TRUST,GAYA vs. ITO, WARD 6(1), KOLKATA,, KOLKATA

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