NISHI GUPTA,FIROZABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(2)(1), FIROZABAD

ITA 681/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra14 October 2026AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

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 appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of the learned 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 the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes. The specific finding on the merits of the addition of Rs. 49,21,444/- was not decided, as the matter was remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Nishi Gupta, filed appeals against orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC. The appeals pertain to Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16. The impugned orders confirmed additions of Rs. 49,21,444/- as unexplained income. These additions were made by the Assessing Officer via assessment orders passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeals ex-parte. The assessee's primary contention was that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the additions without providing an adequate opportunity of hearing. The revenue contended that the assessee was provided with multiple hearing opportunities but failed to comply.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 49,21,444/- ex-parte, thereby violating the principles of natural justice, as argued by the assessee. 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte, given the assessee's non-compliance with multiple hearing notices, as argued by the revenue. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte without affording an adequate opportunity of hearing, which is a violation of natural justice. The assessee sought a fresh adjudication on merits. Revenue's Contention: The revenue contended that the assessee was provided with as many as 8 opportunities of hearing during the first appellate proceedings, but the assessee did not respond or comply. Consequently, the CIT(A) was compelled to pass an ex-parte order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (DB

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 13.10.2026Pronounced: 13.10.2026

PER:BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, A.M.

The facts and issues involved in all these appeals are almost identical, hence, for the sake of convenience and brevity, these appeals are being decided by this common order. The facts of ITA No. 680/Agr/2026 are only being narrated as under.

2.

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 06.07.2026 passed in appeal No NFAC/2012-13/10134620 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/ NFAC(Delhi) [(hereinafter

ITA No.680,681,682/Agr/2026

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. 2013-14, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte, confir

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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →