SUJATA RAVI PUNJA,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSMENT OFFICER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4352/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 June 2026AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal on merits after providing an effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was disposed of without effective representation due to bona fide reasons. The assessee could not properly respond to notices, leading to a lack of adequate opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A) and if the ex parte order should be set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 254,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

Hearing: 17.06.2026Pronounced: 23.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4352/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sujata Ravi Punja Assessment Officer of Income 173/33, Chaturbhai Khetsi Tax, Building, National Faceless Assessment S.T. Road, Masjid Bunder, Centre, Vs. Mumbai – 400009 Delhi Maharashtra (PAN : AABPP9372R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : None Revenue : Smt.Sujatha Iyyanger, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 17.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 23.06.2026 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1084860378(1), dated 16.01.2026, passed against the assessment order by Assessment Officer, u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 254 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 25.03.2023, for Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

The primary grievance raised through the grounds of appeal before us is that the first appeal has been disposed of without effective representation on behalf of the assessee. From the perusal of the orders

2 ITA No. 4352/Mum/2026 Sujata Ravi Punja, AY 2013-14

of the authorities below, it is noted that due to bona fide and genuine reasons, the assessee could not properly respond to the notices issued during the course of the appellate proceedings and, consequently, was deprived of an adequate opportunity of presenting its case before the learned CIT(A). It has, therefore, considered by us and confronted to the ld. DR that in the interest of substantial justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing.

3.

The learned Departmental Representative fairly submitted that she would have no serious objection if the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

4.

Having considered the aforesaid submission and the material placed on record, we are of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the impugned ex parte order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh on merits and in accordance with law after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation in the appellate proceedings. Since the appeal pertains to an old assessment year and has already remained pending for a considerable period, and further the matter is being restored on account of the bona fide reasons explained by the assessee without adjudication on merits, we deem it appropriate to observe that the learned CIT(A) shall endeavour to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. We make it

3 ITA No. 4352/Mum/2026 Sujata Ravi Punja, AY 2013-14

clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issues involved and all contentions are left open.

5.

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

Order is pronounced in the open court on 23 June, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Girish Agrawal) Judicial Member (Accountant Member) Dated: 23 June, 2026 MP, Sr.P.S. Copy to : 1 The Appellant 2 The Respondent 3 DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4 Guard File 5 CIT BY ORDER,

(Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 144B

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →