M/S GULAB CHANDRA AND SONS,SEONDHA ROAD, INDERGARH DIST DATIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MAIN BUILDING, GWALIOR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that while the assessee's non-cooperative conduct was not appreciated, in the interest of justice, it was deemed just and proper to restore the matter back to the file of the learned CIT(Appeals) for passing an order afresh on merits and in accordance with law. The Tribunal emphasized that the first appellate authority shall ensure substantial compliance with the principles of natural justice. The issue of whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing an ex-parte order was implicitly addressed by the decision to restore the matter, acknowledging the potential lack of proper opportunity. The Tribunal did not decide on the merits of the original appeal.
What were the facts?
The assessee, M/s Gulab Chandra And Sons, filed an appeal against the order dated 20.02.2026 passed by the CIT(Appeals)-3, Bhopal, which had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte. The assessment year in question is 2020-21. The appeal before the ITAT was filed with a delay of approximately 7 days, which was condoned by the Tribunal in the interest of justice. The primary ground raised by the assessee was that the CIT(Appeals) passed the impugned order without providing a proper opportunity of hearing. The revenue contended that sufficient opportunities were given to the assessee during the first appellate stage, but the assessee failed to respond, leading to the ex-parte order.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, thereby violating the principles of natural justice, as per Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(Appeals) passed the impugned order without providing a proper opportunity of hearing. Revenue's contention: The revenue argued that sufficient opportunities were afforded to the assessee during the first appellate stage, but the assessee did not respond, compelling the CIT(Appeals) to pass an ex-parte order. The revenue also noted the non-cooperative conduct of the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA(DB
Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
PER: BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, A.M.
This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 20.02.2026 passed in appeal No CIT(A)-3, Bhopal/IT-11643/2019-20 by the ld. CIT(Appeals)-3/Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as the Commissioner of Income Tax), u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2020-21, wherein ld. CIT (A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte.
At the very outset, it is noticed that this second appeal has been filed on 07.05.2026 by a delay of about 07 days. In the interest of justice and keeping the view the short span of delay, we condone the delay caused in filing this appeal. The appeal is admitted for hearing.
Appellant assessee has preferred this secon
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
