DHARMESH CONSTRUCTION,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD 2(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 838/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 August 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. Finding the CIT(A) order to be ex-parte and non-speaking, violating natural justice, the matter was restored for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 was filed 28 days late. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte and violated natural justice as they could not present all evidence. The Revenue did not object to remitting the issue.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was vitiated due to violation of natural justice and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 12/08/2026Pronounced: 28/08/2026

Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the Assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2018-19, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAC) Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short 'NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)'], dated 11.02.2026, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act, dated 07.0

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →