ADARSH KUMAR JHUNJHUNWALA,GUWAHATI, ASSAM vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 165/GTY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 March 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRIDUVVURU RL REDDY (Vice President), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay after finding the reasons to be bonafide and genuine. The Tribunal found that the Ld. CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee preferred an appeal against an ex-parte order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi for AY 2017-18. The appeal was filed after a delay of 390 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without hearing the assessee is justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Gupta, AR
For Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, DR
Hearing: 10.03.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

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 19.03.202 for the AY 2017-18.

2.

At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 390 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reason for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reason, hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal.

3.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the ld. CIT (A) has passed ex-parte order when assessee failed to make any compliance before the ld. CIT (A) despite three opportunities granted by the appellate authority. The ld. AR therefore prayed that in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee may be given one more opportunity of presenting his case before the ld. CIT (A) to which the ld. DR did not oppose.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the appellate authority has passed an ex-parte order without hearing the assessee and therefore, we restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

5.

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

Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →