AMIT SHARMA ,DELHI vs. NFAC , DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal remitted the matters back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for re-adjudication. The AO was directed to provide the assessee an opportunity to be heard and consider all evidence. The Tribunal clarified that if the assessee does not cooperate, the AO can proceed with the assessment as per law.
What were the facts?
The assessee preferred four appeals against orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). The appeals arose out of assessment orders passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The impugned order was passed ex parte as the assessee could not appear despite notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment order passed ex parte is valid and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity for re-adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, G: NEW DELHI
Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
ORDER PER BENCH: These four appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the different orders dated 25.07.2025, 01.08.2025, 06.08.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)], Delhi pertaining to ITA No.-5811 to 5814/Del/2025 Amit Sharma Assessment Year 2017-18, arising out of Assessment order same dated 28.03.2022 passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Having heard the Ld. Counsels appearing for the respective parties and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the impugned order being an ex parte one, as the assessee for some reasons or the other could not appear despite notices being sent to the assessee on several occasions, and having regard to the assessment order being passed under section 144 of the Act, in order to meet the ends of justice, we remitting the matters to the file of the Ld. AO for re-adjudication of the issues raised by the assessee before him within period of 10 months from the date of passing of this order. The Ld. AO is further directed to grant an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and consider the evidence on record or any other evidences which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter.
We also make it clear that, in the event the assessee does not cooperate with the Ld. AO, the said authority would be at liberty to proceed and finalize the assessment strictly in accordance with law. Accordingly, all the four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
ITA No.-5811 to 5814/Del/2025 Amit Sharma 4. In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
