RADHIKA JEWELLERS,PORBANDAR vs. ITO WD 2(3), CIT APPEAL, PORBANDAR

ITA 974/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot06 October 2026AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment was carried out under section 144 read with section 144B of the Act, and the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) was an ex-parte and non-speaking order. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not been granted a sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not effectively plead its case before the Ld. CIT(A). Citing the settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play mandate granting sufficient opportunity to the affected party to contest their case, the Tribunal decided not to delve into the merits of the grounds raised. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. The AO was directed to pass a speaking order after affording a sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who was also directed to contest its stand forthwith. The assessee was granted liberty to adduce relevant evidence before the AO, and the AO was directed to allow adequate opportunity for submissions and then pass a fair and judicious speaking order. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Radhika Jewellers, filed an appeal against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)] dated 03.06.2026. This order arose from an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 144 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 23.01.2025, for the assessment year 2023-24. The assessee contended that the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) order was ex-parte and vitiated due to a violation of natural justice, as the assessee could not represent its case or file necessary documents and details before the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) due to their unavailability at the time of proceedings. The assessee is now ready with the required documents and sought an opportunity to plead its case before the AO.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ex-parte order passed by the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) is vitiated on account of violation of the principle of natural justice, thereby warranting a remand to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the Income-tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the impugned order was ex-parte and violated the principle of natural justice because it could not represent its case before the Ld. CIT(A) and was unable to file necessary documents and details before both the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) as they were not available during the proceedings. The assessee is now prepared with the relevant documents and evidence and requested another opportunity to present its case before the AO, seeking restoration of the matter to the AO's file. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue's learned Senior Departmental Representative (DR) did not object to the matter being restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kothiya, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 27/07/2026Pronounced: 06/10/2026

Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2023-24, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAC) Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 03.06.2026, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144, r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 23.01.2025. 2. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →