RAM NARESH SINGH PARMAR,GWALIOR vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), GWALIOR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 277/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 May 2026AY 2022-233 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) did not pass an order on merits and the assessee had made partial compliance during assessment. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with multiple notices. The CIT(A) confirmed the assessed income of Rs. 75,21,270/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was sustainable and if the matter should be adjudicated on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (DB

Before: SHRI M BALAGANESH & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Agarwal, CA
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 20.05.2026Pronounced: 20.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA (DB) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 277/Agr/2026 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Ram Naresh Singh Parmar,, Gali Vs. ITO, Ward-2 (1), Aayakar No. 1, Panchwati Colony, Bhawan, City Centre, Gwalior- Bahodapur, A.B. Road, Gwalior- 474002 474012 PAN : ANZPP0387M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Mahesh Agarwal, CA Department by Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR) Date of hearing 20.05.2026 Date of pronouncement 20.05.2026 ORDER PER: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, J.M.

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 03.02.2026 passed in appeal No NFAC/2021-22/10328499 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, /NFAC (Delhi) (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2022-23, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte, confirming the assessed income of Rs. 75,21,270/- vide assessment order dated 01.03.2024 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act.

ITA No.277/Agr/2026 2. Perused the records and heard ld representative for the appellant assessee and ld Sr DR for the respondent revenue to the extent as to whether the ex-parte impugned order is sustainable. 3. It transpires from the perusal of records that during the first appellate stage, ld CIT(A) issued various notices on 19.03.2025, 28.08.2025, 19.09.2025, 03.10.2025, 13.10.2025, 19.11.2025, 06.01.2026 and 19.01.2026 to the assessee. The appellant assessee remained absolutely non compliant to these notices. Such reluctant attitude of the assessee cannot be appreciated. Ld CIT(A) was, thus, compelled to pass ex parte impugned order. It is, however, noticed that the ld CIT(A) has not passed the order on merit as required u/s 250(6) of the Act. We further note that the assessee made partial compliance during the assessment proceedings. Hence, in such circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of ld assessing officer for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law. We, further, direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the ld assessing officer for the expeditious and effective disposal. Needless to say that ld assessing officer shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.

2 | P a g e

ITA No.277/Agr/2026

4.

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

Order pronounced in the Open Court on - 20.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (M BALAGANESH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 25.05.2026 *Aamir Siddiqui, PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →