VINOD KUMAR JHAJHARIA,JHNUNJHUNU vs. ITO, WARD-1, SIKAR, SIKAR

ITA 1827/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 October 2026AY 2016-173 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the assessee was to be allowed for statistical purposes. Considering the submissions of the assessee and the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), the Tribunal deemed it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The direction was to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee, verify all the relevant documents filed by the assessee, and then pass a fresh order in accordance with the provisions of law. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee should cooperate by filing all the required documents before the Ld. CIT(A) for passing an order on the merits of the case. The specific grounds raised by the assessee were not decided on merits by the ITAT, but the procedural defect of the ex-parte dismissal was rectified.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Vinod Kumar Jhajharia, an individual and mining contractor, filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2016-17 declaring Rs. 20,64,820/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) made various disallowances, including TCS interest, repairs to machinery, petrol-diesel expenses, and tender security forfeited, determining the total income at Rs. 96,60,160/-. The assessee appealed to the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai. The CIT(A) granted three opportunities for hearing, but the assessee sought adjournments and did not file written submissions, leading the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution via an ex-parte order dated 31.10.2025. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by dismissing the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution, despite the assessee seeking adjournments, and failing to decide the appeal on merits solely because the assessee had not discharged his onus (Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(A) issued three notices within 45 days, for which the assessee sought adjournments. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte. The assessee is now prepared to file all necessary details and requested that the matter be set aside back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision. Revenue's Contention: The Learned DR appearing for the Revenue supported the orders passed by the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, FCA

आदेश/ORDER

PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the assessee as against the ex-parte appellate order dated 31.10.2025 passed by Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, arising out of the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and a mining contractor. The assessee filed his return of income for the

2 I.T.A No. 1827/JPR/2025 Page No Vinod Kumar Jhajharia

Assessment Year 2016-17 on 17.10.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 20,64,820/-. The return was taken for scrutiny and AO made various disallowance of TCS interest, Repairs to machinery, Patrol-Diesel expenses, Tender Security Forfeited and determined the total income of Rs. 96,60,160/- and demanded tax thereon.

Aggrieved against the assessment order, assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has given three opportunities of hearing on 20.06.2025, 15.07.2025 and 0-5.08.2025 and assessee sought for adjournments and not filed any written submission, thereby Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution.

Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal:-

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee by holding that assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal even when assessee has sought adjournment. He has further erred in not deciding the appeal on merit only for the reason that assessee has not discharged his onus. 2. The appellant craves to alter, amend and modify any ground of appeal..

Heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has issued three notices within 45 days for which the assessee sought for adjournments and Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte and assessee is now prepare to file all necessary details before Ld. CIT(A) and thereby requested to set aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A).

3 I.T.A No. 1827/JPR/2025 Page No Vinod Kumar Jhajharia

Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue supported the orders passed by the lower authorities. Considering the submission of the assessee and ex-party order passed by Ld. CIT(A), we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and verify all the relevant documents filed by the assessee and then pass fresh order in accordance with the provisions of law. Needless to say the assessee should cooperate by filing all the required documents before the Ld. CIT(A) for passing the order on merits of the case.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 13-10-2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 13/10/2026 Dhananjay K., Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, जयपुर

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →