PARMOD KUMAR,HARYANA vs. ITO WARD 1, HISAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8705/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 January 2026AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial 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 acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps due to the new faceless hearing system and decided that restoring the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication was appropriate.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for assessment year 2013-14 against an order by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The proceedings before the CIT(A)/NFAC were ex-parte, leading to the affirmation of the Assessing Officer's disallowances.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte proceedings before the CIT(A)/NFAC were justified and whether the appeal should be restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri V. Raj Kumar, Adv
Hearing: 22.01.2026Pronounced: 22.01.2026

Assessee by Shri V. Raj Kumar, Adv. Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 22.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 22.01.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN & Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059070913(1), dated 26.12.2023 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

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 I 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.

3.

Mr. Manoj Kumar 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.

4.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, 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.

5.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC 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. 2 | P a g e

6.

The assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd January, 2026.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →