SACHIN KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 42(5), NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issue back to the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present their case. The assessee is directed to appear and substantiate their claims without seeking adjournments.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return of income, but failed to appear before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner (Appeals) despite multiple opportunities. The AO completed the assessment ex parte, making significant additions. The CIT(A) also confirmed these additions ex parte.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex parte assessment and appellate orders are justified in the absence of assessee's compliance. The primary issue is to provide the assessee a final opportunity to present their case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC-1 : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA
ORDER
PER R.K. PANDA, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 26th March, 2018 of the CIT(A)-14, New Delhi, relating to the assessment year 2013-14.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 30th September, 2013, declaring the total income of the assessee at Rs.3,79,980/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was served on the assessee. However, none appeared on the appointed date. Thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) was also issued to the assessee on different dates, but, again there was no compliance. Subsequently, the AR of the assessee appeared before the AO and filed a few details and sought adjournment. Thereafter, again, there was continuous non-compliance and the assessee was seeking adjournment under some pretext or the other. Finally, the AO completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.31,96,480/- as against the returned income of Rs.3,79,980/-. Since nobody appeared before the CIT(A) despite five opportunities granted, the ld.CIT(A), in the ex parte order passed by him, confirmed the addition made by the AO.
Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard the ld. DR and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that due to non-submission of full details before the AO, the AO passed ex parte order determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.31,96,480/- as against the returned income of Rs.3,79,980/- wherein he made addition of Rs.23,72,720/- on account of peak credit in the bank account, disallowance u/s 69C of Rs.3,94,275/- and disallowance of deduction claimed under Chapter VIA amounting to Rs.49,500/-. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), the ld.CIT(A), in the ex parte order passed by him, sustained the various additions made by the AO. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the CIT(A) and substantiate its case without seeking any adjournment under any pretext failing which, the ld.CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order was pronounced in the open court on conclusion of the hearing itself, i.e., on 15th June, 2021.
More judgments on Section 142(1)
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Subhash Chand Saini, Jaipur vs ITO Ward, Behror, BherorITA 36/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gaurav Jiteshbhai Joshi, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1000/RJT/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026