What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex parte order, noting that the issues were not adjudicated on merits. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to present their case.

The assessee's appeal was decided ex parte by the CIT(A) due to alleged non-compliance and lack of understanding of online proceedings after the case was transferred to the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The assessee claimed that notices were not received and thus could not present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex parte without proper adjudication on merits and whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity to present their case.

Ajay Subash Chand Bafna, Ajmer vs ITO | s.250 | ITAT Jaipur 2026

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

Hearing: 23.03.2026Pronounced: 19.05.2026

P a g e | 1 ITA No.568/JPR/2025 Ajay Subash Chand Bafna IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.568/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year:2007-08) Ajay Subash Chand Bafna, Vs. ITO 301, Radhika Terrace, Ward 2(1) Dhobi Sheri, Nanpura, Ajmer Timaliawad Surat 395001 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No:AFZPB3393K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Himanshu Gandhi, C.A. (thru. VC) Respondent by : Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT Date of Hearing 23.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 19.05.2026 O R D E R The present appeal has been preferred by assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 13.02.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). 2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has brought my attention to the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) to submit that the appeal of the assessee has been decided ex parte of the assessee in limine on account of alleged non-compliance, without properly appreciating the facts or adjudicating the issues on merits. The Learned Counsel has submitted that earlier the assessee had filed the appeal in physical form

P a g e | 2 ITA No.568/JPR/2025 Ajay Subash Chand Bafna and the assessee duly represented its case before the Ld. CIT(A). However, later on, the matter was transferred to the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The assessee was not conversant with the online proceedings and even the notices, if any, issued by the National Faceless Appeal Centre did not come to the notice of the assessee. Therefore, the case of the assessee remained unrepresented before the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The learned counsel, therefore, has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.

Considering above submissions and noting that even the National Faceless Appeal Centre/Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without adjudicating the issues on merits, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee afresh, after providing proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case.

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 19/05/2026.

Sd/- (Sanjay Garg) Judicial Member Dated 19.05.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS

P a g e | 3 ITA No.568/JPR/2025 Ajay Subash Chand Bafna

AJAY SUBASH CHAND BAFNA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), AJMER, AJMER

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