SHAMA INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-22(2), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7596/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 April 2026AY 2019-203 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had indeed passed an ex-parte order without granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) was heard. The assessee's counsel argued that the CIT(A) did not provide a reasonable opportunity for being heard, despite the assessee receiving notices late and seeking adjournments.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte appellate order without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI SHRI MANISH AGARWAL SHRI SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Yadav, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms. Ankush Kalra, Senior DR
Hearing: 01.04.2026Pronounced: 01.04.2026

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in appeal No.NFAC/2018-19/10476102 dated 19th September, 2025. Assessment was framed by the ACIT, Circle-22(2), Delhi for the assessment year 2019-20 under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 20th March, 2025.

2.

At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee stated that learned CIT(A) has not allowed reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and passed an ex-parte appellate order. When it was pointed out to him that appeal was fixed for hearing at least four times fixing the date of hearing as 30.05.2025, 21.07.2025, 05.08.2025 and 04.09.2025, the learned Counsel explained that assessee could not received the notice on first two hearings but received mail through ITBA system vide registered mail ID and sought adjournment on 05.08.2025 and 04.09.2025. But, learned CIT(A), without allowing some time to the assessee, decided the appeal ex-parte by applying Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee & Others – [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) and of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar Vs. CWT – [1979] 223 ITR 480 (MP) simplicitor for non- prosecution of appeal. When these facts were confronted to the learned Senior DR, she could not controvert the above fact situation.

3.

After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material placed before us, we are of the view that learned CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In such circumstances, we have no alternative except to set aside the order of learned CIT(A) and remand the matter to his file for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Decision pronounced in the open Court on conclusion of hearing on 1st April, 2026.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →