LEELA RAM GURJAR,VALLABHNAGAR vs. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

ITA 784/JODH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur27 October 2026AY 2020-20214 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the ex-parte completion of appellate proceedings by the Learned CIT(A) was against the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) observed a lack of required documents and submissions from the appellant, leading to ex-parte orders. The Tribunal opined that matters should be decided on merits, avoiding a purely technical viewpoint. Therefore, providing the appellant one more opportunity to present their case was deemed justified. Consequently, the impugned order of the NFAC was set aside to the extent challenged. The matter was restored to the file of the learned Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the issue afresh after considering the submissions and evidence furnished by the appellant and affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The appellant was also directed to cooperate with the assessment proceedings and furnish all relevant details. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Leela Ram Gurjar, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench, against an order dated October 17, 2023, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2020-2021. The appeal was filed with a delay of 291 days, which the Tribunal condoned in the interest of justice. The core of the dispute stemmed from the fact that both the Assessing Officer (AO) and the NFAC observed that the appellant had not filed required documents or submissions, leading to ex-parte assessment and appellate orders.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellate proceedings completed ex-parte by the Learned CIT(A) are against the principles of natural justice and liable to be set aside? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's contention: The Learned AR argued that the Learned CIT(A) erroneously completed the appellate proceedings ex-parte, which violates the principles of natural justice and warrants setting aside the order on this ground alone. Revenue's contention: The Learned DR relied upon the orders passed by both the lower authorities (AO and CIT(A)). The judgment does not record specific arguments from the revenue beyond this general reliance.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR

Before: SMT ANNAPURNA GUPTA, HON’BLE & SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CA (Physically), Shri Shailendra Sharma, CIT-DR

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BENCH: DB BEFORE SMT ANNAPURNA GUPTA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 784/JODH/2024 Assessment Year : 2020-2021) LEELA RAM GURJAR THE ASSESSING OFFICER GOOJARON KA LIMBAWAS, ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, ARINDA,VALLABHNAGAR, UDAIPUR- INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, Vs. 313602, RAJASTHAN DELHI DELHI-, DELHI Appellant Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: BQTPG 9204 Q

Appellant represented by: Shri P.C. Parwal, CA (Physically) Shri Shailendra Sharma, CIT-DR Respondent represented by: (Through V.C.) Date of conclusion of hearing: 08 / 09 / 2026 Date of pronouncement: 27 / 10 / 2026 ORDER PER: SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER The aforetitled appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the order dated 17th October 2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi [for the sake of convenience, hereinafter referred to as NFAC/CIT(A)].

2 ITA 784/JODH/2024 Asst. Year: 2020-21 2. At the outset, it is noticed that the present appeal has been filed with a delay of 291 days, for which the appellant has requested for condone the same, by submitted the application supported with affidavit and in order to achieve the goal of justice and preferred the disposal of the matter on its merits alone, we inclined to condone the same. 4. Heard rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on record. 5. Reiterating the grounds of appeal, the Learned AR submitted that the Learned CIT(A) erroneously completed the appellate proceedings ex party, which is against the principles of natural justice and liable to set aside on its score only. 6. Per Contra, the Learned DR relied upon the orders passed by both lower authorities. 7. From bare perusal of both orders, we noticed that it is observed by the Learned AO and Learned CIT(A) the appellant has not filed required documents/submissions in support of issue for adjudication and assessment order passed ex party having no response from appellant. In our opinion, matter should be decided on its merits alone by avoiding technical view point and for this purpose, providing one more opportunity to appellant to state his case is justified and we inclined so.

3 ITA 784/JODH/2024 Asst. Year: 2020-21 7A. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside to the extent challenged before us and the matter is restored to the file of the learned Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the issue afresh, after considering the submissions and evidences furnished by the appellant and affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant and simultaneously, the appellant is directed to cooperate with the assessment proceedings and furnish all relevant details/evidences as may be called for by the Learned Assessing Officer. 8. Consequently, this appeal is hereby allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above. Order pronounced in Open Court on 27/10/2026

Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SUDHIR PAREEK) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 27/10/ 2026. Nimisha, Sr. PS True Copy

4 ITA 784/JODH/2024 Asst. Year: 2020-21 Copies to : (1) The appellant. (2) The respondent. (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File

BY ORDER, NIMISHA Digitally signed by NIMISHA ARORA ARORA Date: 2026.10.28 10:47:57 +05'30' Sr. Private Secretary ITAT Jodhpur Bench

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →