MAHAVIR PRASAD GUPTA AND SONS ,DELHI vs. DCIT , CENTRAL CIRCLE -16 , DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6206/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 January 2026AY 2023-241 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the ends of justice would be met by remitting the matter back to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The CIT(A)'s ex-parte order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) without providing sufficient opportunity for hearing. The assessee requested remission back to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication, citing non-intentional non-compliance due to personal reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee is justified?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ORDER PER AMITABH SHUKLA, AM,

The captioned appeal has been preferred by the assessee against order dated 30.09.2025 of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)] arising out of assessment order dated 31.03.2025 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, pertaining to Assessment Year 2023-24. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed its appeal ex-parte without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly requested that the matter may be considered for remission back to the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The ld. Counsel submitted that the non-compliance was not intentional and that the assessee could not comply to the statutory notices on account of some compelling personal reasons.

3.

The ld. DR did not resist the proposal of appellant assessee.

4.

We have heard rival submission in the light of the materials available on record. Para-4 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that between a short period of 20.06.2025 to 15.09.2025, statutory notices were issued, which remained non-complied. The ld. CIT(A) concluded the non-compliances as wilful defaults and proceeded to pass the ex-parte order. There is no denying the fact that law assist those who are vigilant however it is also a fact that no litigant benefits by non-prosecution of its matter. Be that as it may be, we are of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the matter is remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct him to re-adjudicate the matter afresh after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and in accordance with law. It shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with the statutory notices

Page 2 of 3 by the ld. CIT(A). All the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →