Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2014-15 arose against an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessee was proceeded ex-parte as none appeared on their behalf. A delay of 39 days in filing the appeal was condoned.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)/NFAC's order was passed ex-parte and lacked substantive adjudication. Considering the possibility of communication gaps due to the faceless hearing system and the assessee being an NRI, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC is sustainable, and if the appeal should be restored to the Assessing Officer.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandra
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1076190365(1) dated 14.05.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. She is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
Delay of 39 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).
Nusrat Banka 4. It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the CIT(A)/NFAC to first frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.
Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.
We have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A)/NFAC has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, an NRI, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.
Nusrat Banka 7. Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the Assessing Officer for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.