SHWETA AGGARWAL,ROHTAK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8455/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 February 2026AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 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 noted that the assessee failed to make any representation before the Ld. CIT(A). However, since an appeal was filed before the Tribunal, it was deemed appropriate in the interest of justice to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and also did not appear before the Tribunal. The Revenue Representative supported the order of the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be allowed for statistical purposes due to non-appearance and failure to provide submissions before the lower authorities, necessitating a remand for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI

For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Yadav, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09.02.2026Pronounced: 13.02.2026

O R D E R

PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM:

1.

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld. CIT(A)’ in short], in Appeal No. NFAC/2018/19/10463609 dated 13.10.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short) for A.Y. 2019-20.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee whereas the Ld. Sr. DR supports the order of the lower authorities and submits that the assessee has failed to make compliance before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, it appears that assessee has nothing to say. Ld. SR DR thus, prayed for the confirmation of the additions made.

Shweta Aggarwal vs. ITO 3. Heard the Ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. From the perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(A), it is observed that the assessee has failed to file any submission before the Ld. CIT(A). Before us also, the assessee has not come forward to dispute the order of the ld. CIT(A). However, when the assessee has filed appeal before the Tribunal, it seems that he is vigilant to represent her case before the Tribunal. Considering the fact that the assessee has failed to make any representation before the ld. CIT(A), in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back again to his file for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing. If the assessee fails to represent his case or furnish any documentary evidences, the JCIT is free to decide the issues on merits.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →