What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for readjudication. This was done to provide the assessee with a copy of the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment, following the Supreme Court's decision in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd.

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2014-15. The assessee did not appear for the hearing and filed an adjournment application without providing reasons. The tribunal rejected the adjournment application.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment was completed without disposing of the assessee's petition for reasons for reopening. Whether the assessee was provided with the reasons for reopening the assessment.

Kalinga Automobiles, Bargarh vs ITO | ITAT Cuttack 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

Hearing: 14.05.2026Pronounced: 14.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.257/CTK/2026 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kalinga Automobiles ITO, Bargarh Vs Canal Avenue, Bargarh H.O Bargarh, Odisha-768028. (PAN: AAHFK2014M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : None (Adjournment application filed) Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14.05.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 14.05.2026

ORDER PER BENCH: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.NFAC/2013-14/10069490/2014-15 dated 15.01.2026 for the assessment year 2014-15.

None represented on behalf of the assessee and an adjournment letter has been filed and Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

The adjournment letter filed by the assessee reads as follows:

ITA No.257/CTK/2026

No reasons have been given. Consequently, the adjournment application is rejected and the appeal is being disposed off. A perusal of the grounds of appeal shows that in Ground no.3, the assessee has challenged the action of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) in completing assessment without disposing off the petition asking for furnishing of reasons for reopening of the assessment. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer reported in 259 ITR 19 (SC) has laid down the principle in regard to reopening specifying that the reasons recorded should have been given to the assessee and objection of the assessee is to be considered and disposed off and then the assessment is to be done. There is no mention in the assessment order that the assessee having been sought the reasons recorded, however, in the appeal, the assessee has sought the reasons recorded. This being so, in the interest of

ITA No.257/CTK/2026

justice, the issues in this appeal are being restored before the Assessing Officer for readjudication after providing the assessee the copy of reasons recorded following the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer referred to supra.

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

Kolkata, the 14th May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member

Dated: 14.05.2026. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar

KALINGA AUTOMOBILES,BARGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BARGARH

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