HRIDESH SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO-6(2), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1905/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 October 2026AY 2011-125 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the appeals were filed against ex-parte appellate orders passed by the CIT(A). The judgment excerpt provided is incomplete and does not contain the Tribunal's decision or reasoning on the issues raised. Therefore, the Tribunal's findings, the reasoning that led to them, the ratio decidendi, and any operative directions are not ascertainable from the provided text. No specific issue was expressly left undecided as the judgment is incomplete.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Hridesh Sharma, is an individual who failed to file a return of income for Assessment Year 2011-12. The Revenue initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. A reassessment order was passed, and a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was levied. The assessee appealed these orders to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The CIT(A) passed ex-parte appellate orders on 27.10.2025 and 07.11.2025, confirming the reassessment and penalty. The assessee has filed two appeals, ITA No. 1905/JPR/2025 and ITA No. 17/JPR/2026, against these ex-parte orders.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ex-parte appellate orders passed by the CIT(A) are sustainable in law, considering the assessee's failure to appear before the appellate authority? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argues that the ex-parte orders were passed without affording a proper opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice. The assessee likely contends that the reassessment and penalty were erroneous and should be adjudicated on merits. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue likely contends that the ex-parte orders were justified as the assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) despite notices. The Revenue would argue that the CIT(A) had no option but to decide the appeal based on the material available on record, leading to the confirmation of the reassessment and penalty.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, JAIPUR

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

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Gupta, CA

PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- These two appeals are filed by the assessee as against the ex- parte appellate orders dated 27.10.2025 and 07.11.2025 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, arising out of reassessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act and confirming of penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act relating to same Asst. Year 2011-12. 2 I.T.A No. 1905/JPR/2025 Page No I T A No. 1 7/J P R/ 2 02 6 Hr i des h S h ar m a 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, has not filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The assessee made transaction of Rs. 1,50,000/- on sale of a property wherein Sub

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →