MAAN PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,GAUTAM NAGAR ,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,NOIDA, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITSSA 5773/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 January 2026AY 2013-144 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, having heard both parties and considering the ex parte nature of the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and the assessee's lack of cooperation before that authority, decided to remit the issues back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for proper adjudication. The Tribunal directed the Ld. CIT(A) to pass a reasoned order based on the evidence on record or any additional evidence the assessee might file during the fresh hearing. The Tribunal also clarified that if the assessee fails to cooperate again, the Ld. CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law. The appeals were accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mann Properties and Developers Pvt. Ltd., filed five appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) challenging orders dated 21.07.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida. These orders pertained to Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2017-18 and arose from an assessment order dated 31.12.2018 passed under Section 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida. The appeals were consolidated as they involved common issues. The assessee's counsel sought an adjournment to file a paper book. The Revenue's representative highlighted that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was ex parte, with the assessee having failed to appear on multiple hearing dates.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should remit the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, given that the Ld. CIT(A)'s order was ex parte and the assessee had not cooperated with the proceedings before that authority. Assessee's Contention: The assessee's counsel sought an adjournment for filing the paper book, implying a desire to present their case properly. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue's representative argued that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was ex parte, and the assessee had failed to appear and cooperate before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the Revenue contended that the matter should be remitted back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, G: NEW DELHI

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, FCA
For Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR)
Hearing: 07.01.2026Pronounced: 07.01.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, G: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A Nos.5773 to 5777/Del/2025 [Assessment Years: 2013-14 to 2017-18] Mann Properties and DCIT, Developers Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-1, 216-B, Gautam Nagar, Vs 2nd Floor, ARTO Complex, New Delhi-110049, Sector-33, Noida, U.P.- 201301, Noida PAN- AGDPM7606D Assessee Revenue Assessee by Shri Manoj Kumar, FCA Revenue by Shri Mahesh Kumar, CIT(DR)

Date of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 07.01.2026 ORDER PER BENCH:

These bunch of five appeals filed by the Assessee are against the same orders dated 21.07.2025 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Noida [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)], pertaining to Assessment Years 2013- 14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 respectively, arising out of same Assessment order dated 31.12.2018 under Section 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the Income-

IT(SS)A- 5773 to 5777/Del/2025 Mann Proper�es and Developers Pvt. Ltd. tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the DCIT, Central Circle-1, Noida (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’). Since the issues involved in both the appeals of the same assessee are related, they are disposed of by this consolidated order, for the sake of convenience and brevity.

2.

The Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee sought for an adjournment for filing the Paper Book, which are to be compiled. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT(DR) has drawn our attention to this particular fact that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is admittedly an ex parte order. In fact, page 2 of the said order mentions about different dates that were fixed for hearing only to provide opportunities to the assessee to represent its case before the said authority. However, for some reason or the other, the assessee could not appear and argue the matter before the Ld. CIT(A).

3.

Under these facts and circumstances of this matter, the Ld. CIT(DR) vehemently opposed the submissions of the Ld. AR and submitted that since the impugned order is an ex parte one and no cooperation was made before the Ld. CIT(A), the order requires to be remitted back to the said authority for fresh hearing on the issues involved therein.

4.

Having heard the Ld. Counsels appearing for the parties and considering the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) dated 21.07.2025 and the dates mentioned therein, despite notices sent to the assessee, none appeared, no co-operation has been made

IT(SS)A- 5773 to 5777/Del/2025 Mann Proper�es and Developers Pvt. Ltd. by the assessee before the said authority, we dispose these appeals by remitting the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the same. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass a reasoned order as per the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter.

5.

We also make it clear that, in the event the assessee does not cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A), the said authority would be at liberty to pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law. Accordingly, these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07th January, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- [BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH] [MADHUMITA ROY] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated- 07.01.2026. Pooja. Copy forwarded to: 1. Assessee 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi, 3

IT(SS)A- 5773 to 5777/Del/2025 Mann Proper�es and Developers Pvt. Ltd.

1.

Date of dictation of Tribunal order 07.01.26 2. Date on which typed draft order is placed 07.01.26 before the dictating Member 3 Date on which typed draft order is placed before the other Member (in the case of DB) 4. Date on which the approved draft order comes to P.S/Sr.P.S 5. Date on which the fair Order is placed before the dictating Member for sign 6. Date on which the fair Order is placed before the other Member for sign ( in the case of DB) 7. Date on which the Order comes back to P.S./Sr.P.S for uploading on ITAT website Date of uploading, if not, reason for not 8. uploading 9. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 10. Date on which order goes for xerox 11. Date on which order goes for endorsement 12. Date on which the file goes to the Superintendent/O.S. for checking 13. Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 14. Date on which the file goes to dispatch section for dispatch the Tribunal Order 15. Date of dispatch of order 16. Date on which file goes to Record Room after dispatch the order

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →