VEENA KESWANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(4), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1281/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 May 2026AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh, considering the legal grounds raised by the assessee, including the validity of the assessment order under Section 144C.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a non-resident, appealed to the CIT(A) against an assessment order. The CIT(A) remitted the matter back to the AO without deciding the grounds of appeal. A key ground raised was the invalidity of the assessment order due to non-compliance with Section 144C.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order was invalid for not following the draft assessment order procedure for non-residents as per Section 144C. Whether the CIT(A) erred by remitting the matter without adjudicating the grounds of appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144C,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Hearing: 23.03.2026Pronounced: 11.05.2026

The present appeal has been preferred by assessee against the orders ofNational Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 18.07.2025, u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

The assessee had taken certain legal grounds before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A), without deciding these grounds, remitted the matter back to the file to the Assessing Officer (AO).

P a g e | 2 ITA No.1281/JPR/2025 Veena Keswani 3. One of the jurisdictional grounds raised before this Tribunal is that, since the assessee is a non-resident, the AO was supposed to pass a draft assessment order first and, thereafter, pass the final assessment order after considering the objections of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the fact, that the assessee was a non-resident, was also brought to the knowledge of the AO. The learned Counsel, therefore, submitted that the assessment order is invalid, as it has not been passed in consonance with the provisions of Section 144C of the Act.

4.

Considering the above submissions, the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside, and matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal of the assessee afresh with a direction to consider and adjudicate the legal grounds taken by the assessee and also the ground relating to the validity of the assessment order in light of the provisions of Section 144C of the Act.

5.

With the above observation, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 11/05/2026.

Sd/- (Sanjay Garg) Judicial Member Dated 11.05.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS

P a g e | 3 ITA No.1281/JPR/2025 Veena Keswani Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT By Order,

Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur

More judgments on Section 144C

All 3,699 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →