SMT. SHEELU,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(5), MEERUT, MEERUT

ITA 4389/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 October 2026AY 2024-253 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside both the assessment order passed by the AO and the appellate order passed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal reasoned that in the interest of justice, it was appropriate to provide the assessee with another opportunity to be heard. All issues in the appeal were restored back to the file of the AO with a direction to pass a fresh assessment order denovo in accordance with law. The assessee was directed to participate in the assessment proceedings and furnish all relevant details. Ground of appeal No. 1 was allowed for statistical purposes. The principle here is that procedural fairness and an opportunity to be heard are paramount, even in cases of initial non-compliance, if the interest of justice so demands.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Smt. Sheelu, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2024-25. The NFAC had confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO had passed an ex-parte assessment order under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the assessee's non-compliance with notices and failure to provide required details. The NFAC also provided five opportunities for hearing, but the assessee failed to respond on 13.02.2026, leading to the disposal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restore the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, considering the assessee's non-compliance with notices from both the AO and the CIT(A). Assessee's contention: The assessee did not explicitly argue any points in the provided text, but the appeal itself implies a challenge to the ex-parte orders. The Tribunal's decision to set aside the orders suggests an acceptance of the need for a fresh hearing. Revenue's contention: The revenue, through the Senior Departmental Representative, likely supported the orders of the lower authorities, emphasizing the assessee's non-compliance. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the revenue.

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, DELHI

Before: ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Ms. Megha Sidhu, Sr. DR

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This Appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘the CIT(A) in short) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 24.02.2026 for Assessment Year 2024-25. 2. Heard both the parties at length and perused the material available on records. From the perusal of impugned order

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 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →