TARA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY MANAGING COMMITTEE,SOUTH SIKKIM vs. ITO, WARD 3(1),, GANGTOK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 987/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 October 2026AY 2023-20242 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine by not condoning the delay of 136 days, without deciding the issue on merit. This action was found to be in violation of the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal also noted that the assessment framed by the Ld. AO was ex-parte under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Act, as the assessee did not respond to notices. Considering these facts and in adherence to the principles of natural justice and fair play, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld. AO. The Ld. AO is directed to decide the matter afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Tara Educational Society Managing Committee, filed an appeal before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2023-24. The NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay of 136 days, without adjudicating the merits. The assessment itself was framed ex-parte by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as the assessee failed to respond to notices during the assessment proceedings. The assessee is now appealing the NFAC's order to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT has the power to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and decide the matter on merits, or if the CIT(A)'s dismissal in limine for delay is final. - Assessee's contention: The assessee implicitly argues that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay and deciding on merits, suggesting a violation of natural justice. The ITAT's subsequent action implies agreement with this. - Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the Revenue regarding the delay or the merits of the case. The Revenue's representative was present but their submissions are not detailed. 2. Whether the ex-parte assessment order passed by the AO is valid, given the assessee's non-response to notices. - Assessee's contention: The assessee's appeal to the ITAT, and the ITAT's decision to restore the matter, suggests the assessee sought an opportunity to present their case on merits, implying the ex-parte assessment was not satisfactory. - Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the Revenue regarding the validity of the ex-parte assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6),Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Giridhar Dhelia, AR
For Respondent: Shri Praveen Das Chowdhury
Hearing: 21.09.2026Pronounced: 07.10.2026

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 20.01.2026 for the AY 2023-24.

2.

At the outset, we observe from the perusal of the record, that the ld. CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal in limine by not condoning the delay of 136 days without deciding the issue on merit, which is in violation of Provision of Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Similarly, we note that the assessment framed by the ld. AO is also framed ex-parte

ITA No. 987/KOL/2026 Tara Educational Society Managing Committee; A.Y. 2023-24 u/s 144 read with section 144B of the Act vide order dated 11.02.2025, when the assessee did not respond to various notices issued by the ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Considering the facts of the case, we are inclined to restore the appeal back to the file of the ld. AO having due regards to the principle of natural justice and fair play, with a direction to decide the same afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 07.10.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 07.10.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy//

Dy. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Page 2 of 2

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →