SANSKAR WELFARE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER CIRCLE EXEMPTION 2(1) DELHI, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that while the assessee was reluctant to respond to notices, in the interest of natural justice, the matter should be remitted back to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to adjudicate the appeal on merits after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in default. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without affording an adequate opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in default without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2387/Del/2026 Asstt. Year : 2023-24
Sanskar Welfare Trust, vs. AO, Circle Exemption 2(1), C/o Ravi Gupta, B-41, LGF,. Delhi Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 [PAN: AAPTS3390A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohit Choudhary, CA, Sh. Harish Choudhary, CA & Ms. Neha Gupta, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. G.P. Singh, Sr. DR.
Date of Hearing 30.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 30.06.2026
ORDER PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JM : 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 23.1.2026 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2022-23/10454284 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24, wherein Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal in default. 2. Against the impugned order, assessee has filed this second appeal on the ground that CIT(A) erred in affirming the additions of Rs. 54,26,200/- made vide exparte impugned order dated 23.01.2025 without affording adequate and effective
opportunity of being heard to the assessee thereby violating the principles of natural justice. 3. Ld. AR for the assessee informed that impugned order has been passed by the Ld. CIT(A), exparte in violation of principles of natural justice. Prayed to set aside the impugned order. 4. Per contra, Ld. DR submitted that sufficient opportunity of hearing has been afforded by the Ld. CIT(A) but for no avail. Thus, he supported the impugned order. 5. We have heard both the sides and perused the records. We find that in the instant case, AO has passed the assessment order u/s. 144/144B of the Act. We
further note that assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by the Ld.
First Appellate Authority, who passed exparte impugned order. The reluctant attitude of the assessee cannot be appreciated. However, in the interest of natural
justice and fair play, we deem it just and proper to afford an opportunity to the
assessee and thus remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits afresh after affording sufficient opportunity
of hearing to the assessee. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and
cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the Ld. CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal of the appeal. Also, assessee
should refrain from seeking any adjournment except for compelling and
unavoidable circumstances. Needless to say that the Ld. CIT(A) shall ensure the
observance of the principles of natural justice. It is made clear that we have not made any observation in respect of the merits of the case. Accordingly, the appeal
is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. 2 | P a g e
In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30.06.2026.
Sd/- Sd/-
(S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Date: 02.07.2026 SRBhatnaggar Copy forwarded to: - 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. DIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order,
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Bench
3 | P a g e
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026