AKSHAT SHRIVASTAVA HUF,GWALIOR vs. DCIT 1(1) GWALIOR, GWALIOR

ITA 672/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra15 October 2026AY 2024-253 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while the assessee's non-cooperative conduct in not responding to the notices issued by the CIT(A) was not appreciated, in the interest of justice, it was deemed appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The Tribunal directed the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending hearings and making submissions before the CIT(A) for expeditious and effective disposal. The CIT(A) was also directed to ensure observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. No other issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Akshat Shrivastava HUF, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Agra Bench, against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax/NFAC (Delhi) for Assessment Year 2024-25. The impugned order of the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte. The assessee's grievance was that the CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order ex-parte without providing an adequate opportunity of hearing. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) had issued multiple notices to the assessee during the first appellate proceedings, but the assessee failed to respond. Consequently, the CIT(A) was compelled to pass an ex-parte order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the assessment order ex-parte, without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee, as per Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte without giving them a proper opportunity to be heard. Revenue's contention: The judgment records that the revenue was represented by the learned Sr. DR. However, no specific arguments were recorded for the revenue on the issue of opportunity of hearing. The judgment notes the non-cooperative conduct of the assessee in not responding to notices issued by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (SMC

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Manuj Sharma, Adv

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)

Hearing: 15.10.2026Pronounced: 15.10.2026

PER:SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, J.M.

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 13.08.2026 passed in appeal No NFAC/2023-24/10580407 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 the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2024-25, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte.

Appellant assessee has preferred this second appeal on the ground that ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the assessment order ex- parte, without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Perused the records. Heard ld representative for the appellant assessee and ld Sr (DR) for the respondent revenue.

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 account Sign 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →