What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was not speaking and did not consider all the submissions made by the assessee. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee company declared a loss after revising its initial income. The Assessing Officer made significant additions, assessing the income at Rs. 96,21,510/-. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) and submitted extensive documentation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) provided an effective opportunity of hearing and considered all submissions before passing an ex-parte order, violating principles of natural justice.

Dhariya Construction Private… vs DCIT | ITAT Pune 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Abhay A Avchat

For Respondent: Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar

Hearing: 25.03.2026Pronounced: 07.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1492/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Dhariya Construction Private Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Limited, Pune Indu Niwas, 43, Shivaji Housing Society, Senapati Bapat Road, Shivajinagar, Pune 411016 Maharashtra PAN : AAECA9056B Appellant Respondent

Appellant by : Shri Abhay A Avchat Respondent by : Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar Date of hearing : 25.03.2026 Date of pronouncement : 07.05.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 04.04.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 28.12.2017 passed u/s.143(3) of the Act.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the first ground of appeal submitted that impugned order is bad in law and void ab-initio as it is an exparte order passed without giving effective opportunity of hearing and without considering the detailed submissions made by the appellant violating the principles of natural justice. He further referring to the paper

ITA No.1492/PUN/2025 Dhariya Construction Pvt. Ltd.

book running into 530 pages submitted that the assessee made various submissions before ld.CIT(A) appearing at pages 53 to 387 of the paper book submitted during the period 19.07.2023 to 07.03.2025. Ld.CIT(A) has not taken cognizance of all these submissions. He therefore prayed for affording one more opportunity.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a Private Limited company and income of Rs.91,44,720/- declared in the return for A.Y. 2015-16 furnished on 22.09.2015 which was subsequently revised on 31.03.2017 declaring loss of Rs.37,77,269/-. After the case being selected for manual scrutiny, assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act has been framed on 28.12.2017 wherein ld. Assessing Officer made various additions amounting to Rs.1,33,98,780/- thereby assessing the income at Rs.96,21,510/-. Thereafter, assessee carried the matter before ld.CIT(A) and filed various written submissions to the notices of hearing issues and the submissions were filed on 19.07.2023, 02.12.2024, 18.02.2025, 01.03.2025, 03.03.2025 and 07.03.2025 and the copies of the same are placed at pages 53 to 387 of the paper book. On perusal of the impugned order, it prima-facie indicates that ld.CIT(A) has not considered all these submissions and the order of ld.CIT(A) cannot be considered speaking as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. We therefore considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the larger interest of justice, deem it appropriate to remit back the issues raised on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that in the set aside proceedings, ld.CIT(A) shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to

ITA No.1492/PUN/2025 Dhariya Construction Pvt. Ltd.

be filed by the assessee and then decide in accordance with law.b Assessee is directed to update email and contact detail on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of the CIT(A)/NFAC are set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 07th day of May, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 07th May, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.05.07 15:23:05 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

DHARIYA CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE, 1(1), PUNE

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