TRINATH MANDAL, KORIYA,KORIYA vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), BILASPUR, BILASPUR

ITA 717/RPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 October 2026AY 2020-2112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, Trinath Mandal, filed an appeal before the ITAT Raipur Bench against the order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2020-21. The appeal arose from an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to the assessee's non-compliance with notices and failure to provide submissions or evidence. The Assessing Officer had disallowed a deduction of Rs. 1,50,000/- under Section 80C and tax relief of Rs. 44,870/- under Section 89(1) for lack of supporting documents and submissions. The CIT(Appeals)/NFAC noted multiple instances of non-compliance by the assessee despite several opportunities and concluded that the assessee was not interested in prosecuting the appeal. The Revenue, represented by the CIT-DR, argued for a remand to the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for denovo adjudication.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in cases where an ex-parte order is passed by the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to the assessee's non-compliance, and considering the principles of natural justice, the matter should be remanded back to the file of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for denovo adjudication. The Tribunal reasoned that the CIT(Appeals) is the first appellate authority and must pass a speaking order on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, as per Sections 250(4) and 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Allowing the Tribunal to decide a legal issue arising from an ex-parte order without the assessee having complied before the lower authority would usurp the powers of the CIT(Appeals) and defeat the legislative intent. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remanded the matter for denovo adjudication, directing the assessee to comply with hearing notices and represent the matter on merits. The CIT(Appeals)/NFAC was directed to pass a speaking order within three months. The grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should remand the matter to the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for denovo adjudication, considering the ex-parte order passed due to the assessee's non-compliance, in light of principles of natural justice and settled precedents. Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded as the assessee did not appear. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC necessitates a remand to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for denovo adjudication as per law. They relied on the ITAT, "Division Bench", Raipur's decisions in Brajesh Singh Bhadoria Vs. Dy./ACIT and Collector Mining, Kondagaon Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), which dealt with similar situations of ex-parte orders and remanded the matters back to the first appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80C,Section 89(1),Section 139(1),Section 148A,Section 148,Section 250(4),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Shri Rituparna Namdeo, CIT-DR
Hearing: 14.10.2026Pronounced: 14.10.2026

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 06.08.2026 for the assessment year 2020-21 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee nor any adjournment petition has been filed. The matter is heard after recording submissions of the Ld. CIT-DR and on a careful perusal of the materials available on record.

3.

At the very

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 80C

All 658 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →