VIVEK KUMAR,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 51(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8706/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Observing that both lower authorities passed ex-parte orders and the CIT(A) did not decide all grounds, the Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 23 days due to lack of knowledge and professional advice. The assessment order and the CIT(A) order were ex-parte, with the CIT(A) not deciding all grounds of appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether ex-parte orders passed by the AO and CIT(A) without deciding all grounds of appeal violate principles of natural justice and warrant a de-novo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

For Appellant: CA Amit Khattar (for M/s Sandeep Kuldeep
Hearing: 07/05/2026Pronounced: 19/05/2026

1 ITA No. 8706/Del/2025 Vivek Kumar Vs. ITO

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 8706/Del/2025 (A.Y 2022-23) Vivek Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer 2442/10, First floor, Beadonpura, Income Tax Department, Karol Bagh Ward 51(1), New Delhi PAN: FWNPK0061H Appellant Respondent Assessee by CA Amit Khattar (for M/s Sandeep Kuldeep & Co.) Revenue by Sh. Mahesh Kumar, CIT (DR) Date of Hearing 07/05/2026 Date of Pronouncement 19/05/2026 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre

(‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 22/09/2025 for the

Assessment Year 2022-23.

2.

There is a delay of 23 days in filing the present Appeal. The

Assessee filed an affidavit contending that the Assessee could not file the

Appeal due to lack of knowledge and also due to wrong advice given by

the professional. Further contended that the delay in filing the present

appeal is not intentional but for the Bonafide reason mentioned in the

Application. Thus, sought for condoning the delay in filing the present

Appeal.

2 ITA No. 8706/Del/2025 Vivek Kumar Vs. ITO

3.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that,

there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought

for dismissal of the present Appeal on delay in latches.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available

on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal. For the

reason mentioned in the Application for condonation of delay, delay of 23

days in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned.

5.

Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be

passed on 29/03/2024 u/s 143 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961

('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an

Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 22/09/2025

vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated

22/09/2025, Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

6.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of

the A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not

decided on the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the order

impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice.

Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

7.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that

the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the

3 ITA No. 8706/Del/2025 Vivek Kumar Vs. ITO

Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have

passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no

interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities

sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

8.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available

on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are

ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the

proceedings. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of

Appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we

deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo

assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being

heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance

with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment

proceedings without fail.

9.

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 19.05.2026 Reshma Naheed, Sr.P.S

4 ITA No. 8706/Del/2025 Vivek Kumar Vs. ITO

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →