NITIN DOBRIYAL,GHAZIABAD vs. WARD 2(2)(1) GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) noted that the Ld. CIT(A)'s order was ex parte and the assessee's case was not effectively adjudicated. The ITAT remitted the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-adjudicate the issue after providing the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard and presenting evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed an ex parte order by the Ld. CIT(A), which confirmed an addition stemming from an assessment under Section 147 for AY 2015-16. The Ld. CIT(A) had passed the order ex parte due to the assessee's non-appearance despite repeated notices.
What were the issues?
The key issue was the validity of an ex parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) without a proper hearing, and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case effectively.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : A : NEW DELHI
Before: Ms. MADHUMITA ROY
(Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Ravi Kant Kumar Chaudhary, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 11.03.2026 ORDER PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM:
The instant appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 24.10.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-1, Pune [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the assessment order dated 30.03.2023 passed by the ITO, Ward 2(1)(3), Ghaziabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. AO’) under Section 147 of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16.
None on behalf of the assessee appeared at the time of hearing of the appeal in spite of notices being sent. However, the Ld. DR referred the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) which is found to be admittedly an ex parte one; in spite of notices being sent to the assessee on a number of occasions, no compliance was made and, therefore, the matter was heard ex parte confirming the addition.
Having regard to this particular aspect of the matter when we find that the order impugned is an ex parte one and the assessee’s case has not been effectively adjudicated in the absence of any assistance rendered by the assessee, we dispose of this appeal by remitting this issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) in order to grant an opportunity of being heard to the assessee to represent its case effectively. The ld. CIT(A) is directed to re-adjudicate the issue upon giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record and any other evidence which the assessee may choose to furnish at the time of hearing.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
