GAURAV BANSAL LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI BRIJ MOHAN BANSAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), AGRA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA(DB) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIALMEMBER ITA No.616/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Gaurav Bansal Legal Heir of Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1)(1) Late Shri Brij Mohan Bansal, Agra – 282002 A-15, Pratap Nagar, Agra- 282010 PAN :ABTPB4258P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv. Department by Shri Harsh Siddharth Gautam, Sr DR Date of hearing 23.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 23.04.2026 ORDER

PER: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JM. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 27.11.2025 passed in Appeal no. NFAC/2012-13/10122580 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax, (NFAC) Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] u/s. 250 of the Income tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Assessment year A.Y. 2013-14, wherein learned CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal exparte. 2. At the very outset, Ld. Representative for the assessee has submitted that the first appeal has been decided by ld. CIT(A) as exparte, Ld. AR

ITA No. 616/Agr/2025

prayed to restore the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on merit after affording an opportunity of hearing to assessee. 3. Ld. DR submitted that the assessee was afforded many opportunities for making response.However, assessee failed to make any submissions, thus, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly decided the appeal exparte. 4. Perused the records and heard Ld. Representative for the appellant assessee and Ld. Sr DR for the respondent revenue. 5. It transpires from the perusal of records that the assessee has filed this appeal on the ground,in addition to others, that learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the said additions exparte,without affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 6. We notice that Ld. CIT(A) has provided various opportunities to the assessee during the first appellate proceedings on 25.09.2024, 12.02.2024, 10.09.2025 and 21.11.2025. The assessee failed to make submissions during the first appellate stage. Ld. CIT(A) was thus compelled to pass exparte impugned order. However, after perusal of the impugned order, we note that learned CIT(A), has not passed the order on merit. It is well settled in law that the reason is the life of law. It is that filament that injects soul to the order. Absence of analysis not only evinces non-application of mind but also mummifies the core spirit of the order. Learned CIT(A) was expected to state the points for determination, decision thereon and the 2 | P a g e

ITA No. 616/Agr/2025

reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits and to pass speaking order. We direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Needless to say, that learned CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. It is made clear that we have not made any observation in respect of the merits of the case. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Impugned order dated 27.11.2025 is set aside.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 23.04.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (S RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 29.04.2026 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra

3 | P a g e