Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 arises from the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order, which upheld the Assessing Officer's additions. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte assessment.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) proceeded ex-parte. Considering potential communication gaps, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in proceeding ex-parte without ensuring proper communication with the assessee, and if the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
147, 144B, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
ORDER
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s order dated 23.12.2024 passed in case no. NFAC/2016-17 10260797, involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) in its detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.
The Revenue during the course of hearing vehemently argues in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands 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, auditor and the arguing counsel in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out.
Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for her afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective
2 | P a g e opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the cases at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.