What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities. The assessee was directed to file additional documents and evidence before the AO, who was instructed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing and pass a fresh order.

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte appellate order. The assessee claimed the initial assessment order was ex-parte due to an unnoticed incorrect email ID, and the subsequent appellate proceedings also resulted in an ex-parte order despite the assessee seeking an adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the lower authorities, and if the ex-parte orders need to be set aside for fresh adjudication.

M/S. D G Nakrani, Bhavnagar vs ACIT | ITAT Ahmedabad 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI T.R.SENTHIL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Hiren J. Trivedi, AR

For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumbhare, Sr.DR

Hearing: 16/07/2025Pronounced: 22/07/2025

PER T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee as against the ex-parte appellate order dated 04/09/2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] arising out of the assessment order passed under section143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) relating to the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.

Ld.Counsel appearing for the assessee filed application under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 stating that during the assessment proceedings, the email-id which was registered with Income Tax Portal with that of the former Chartered Accountant email-id amibhav2004@yahoo.com. Since the same was unnoticed, assessee could not reply to the notices which resulted in passing ex-parte order by the Ld.A.O.

During appellate proceedings, the case was fixed for hearing on five occasions from 20/01/2021 to 19/07/2024. More particularly, the case was fixed for hearing on 18/07/2024, assessee sought for 30 days adjournment. However, the hearing was re-fixed on 09/08/2024 and passed Ld.CIT(A) ex-parte appellate order. Thus, the assessee filed application under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, seeking permission to file the following additional evidences, namely, financial statements for the AY 2017-18, copy of the ITR, copy of the six bank account statements, cash book & cash-flow details of cash withdrawal and month-wise cash expenditure and other details which is running to 564 pages. Since the assessment order also an ex-parte order, the assessee requested to set aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to verify the additional documents and pass order on merits.

Ld. Sr.DR appearing for the Revenue has no serious objection in setting aside the matter back to the file of JAO for verification of additional documents filed for the first time before this Tribunal.

Recording the statements of rival parties, the ex-parte orders 5. passed by the lower authorities are hereby set aside with a direction to the assessee to file the additional documents, evidences before the JAO and explain its case. The Ld.JAO is directed to give reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and then pass fresh assessment order in accordance with the provisions of law.

M/S. D G NAKRANI,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments