What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte and non-speaking order without affording the assessee sufficient opportunity to be heard. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.

The assessee's appeal was directed against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that notices of hearings were not served, preventing them from representing their case and leading to a violation of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice due to non-service of notices and lack of opportunity to be heard.

Sureshbhai Tejabhai Kakadia… vs DCIT | s.144, 250 | ITAT Rajkot 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI

For Appellant: Shri Ragendra Singhal, Ld. AR

For Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR

Hearing: 20/02/2026Pronounced: 04/05/2026

आदेश / ORDER

Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:

Captioned appeal filed by assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2019- 20, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, dated 30.07.2025, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s.144 of the Act on 20.09.2021.

At the outset itself, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld.

ITA No. 52/Rjt/2026 – A.Y. 2019-20 Sureshbhai Tejabhai Kakadia vs. DCIT/ACIT

CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the appellate proceedings, notices of hearings were not served on the assessee, therefore, assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and as a result, the Ld. CIT(A) passed ex parte order. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that assessee wants to file additional evidence, therefore, matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the assessing officer may be granted to the assessee.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the Revenue relied on the finding of the assessing officer.

I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment order was passed u/s 144 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non- speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the Ld. CIT(A). I note that the Ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer for de novo adjudication

Page 2 of 3

ITA No. 52/Rjt/2026 – A.Y. 2019-20 Sureshbhai Tejabhai Kakadia vs. DCIT/ACIT

and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. It is needless to say that the assessee will be at liberty to adduce any evidences as deemed relevant before the assessing officer at the time of proceedings in consequence to this order and the assessing officer shall, allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being, heard and to make relevant submissions, and then pass a speaking order which is fair and judicious.

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

Order is pronounced in the open court on 04/05/2026.

Sd/- (Dr. Arjun Lal Saini) लेखा सद�/Accountant Member राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 04/05/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, RAJKOT 6. Guard File By order

Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot

Page 3 of 3

SURESHBHAI TEJABHAI KAKADIA,RAJKOT vs. DCIT/ACIT CENT-1, RKT, RAJKOT

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