What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without deciding the grounds of appeal and without giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against an assessment order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte without providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The assessee contended that the CIT(A)'s order was passed without a proper hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard. The validity of an ex-parte order passed without affording a proper hearing.

Deserve Nirman Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH,

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Agarwal, AR

For Respondent: Shri Santanu Ghosh, Sr. DR

Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 17.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.2903/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Deserve Nirman Private Limited Vs. ITO, Ward-9(1), Kolkata C/o Subhash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [PAN: AAECD0197J] APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Appellant by : Shri Subhash Agarwal, AR Respondent by : Shri Santanu Ghosh, Sr. DR

Date of hearing : 15.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 17.06.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [“the Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 03.10.2025passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the assessment year 2012-13.

Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 28.03.2015 u/s 143(3) of the Act by making certain additions. As against the assessment order dated 28.03.2015,

ITA No.2903/KOL/2025 Deserve Nirman Private Limited; A.Y: 2012-13 Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 03.10.2025, dismissed the appeal filed by the Assessee.

The Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has not provided opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. Thus, sought for hearing the appeal.

Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) has passed order impugned by dismissing the appeal of the Assessee, in accordance with law and the same requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the appeal.

We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. As it can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the order has been passed ex-parte, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the grounds of appeal urged by the Assessee. In view of the same, we restore the first appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

ITA No.2903/KOL/2025 Deserve Nirman Private Limited; A.Y: 2012-13 6. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 17.06.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 17.06.2026 DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

DESERVE NIRMAN PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 9(1),, KOLKATA

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