What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had indeed dismissed the appeal ex parte without considering the adjournment request, thus violating the principle of natural justice. The impugned order was set aside.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) failed to consider their request for an adjournment, violating the principle of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without considering the assessee's request for adjournment, thereby violating the principle of natural justice.

Aman Arora, New Delhi vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Rajat Garg, Adv

For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Hearing: 23.06.2026Pronounced: 23.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 8272/Del/2025, A.Y. 2019-20 Aman Arora Vs. ITO A-25, Ward21(1), New Krishna Park, C.R.Building, Delhi New Delhi �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ADTPA4999E Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Rajat Garg, Adv. Respondent by : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.06.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeal filed by the assessee against order dated 13.10.2025 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] arising out of assessment order dated 25.03.2024.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without considering the request for

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 8272/Del/2025 Aman Arora, New Delhi adjournment in violation of principle of natural justice. The matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A).

Ld. Departmental Representative relied on impugned order.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal ex parte, order dated 13.10.2025 failed to consider request in adjournment in violation of principle of natural justice of providing reasonable opportunity of hearing.

In view of above material facts in interest of substantial justice, impugned order dated 13.10.2025 of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 23.06.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30.06.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 8272/Del/2025 Aman Arora, New Delhi 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

AMAN ARORA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, C R BUILDING

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