GIRDHARI LAL,FARIDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(3), FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 282/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 January 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the A.O. and Ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders, and the Ld. CIT(A) did not decide all grounds on merits. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the A.O. for de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The Assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which dismissed the Assessee's appeal. The assessment order was passed ex-parte under Section 143(3) and 69C of the Income Tax Act, and the Ld. CIT(A) also passed an ex-parte order without deciding all grounds on merit.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the A.O. and CIT(A) were justified, and if not, should the case be remanded for de novo assessment to ensure principles of natural justice are followed?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Hearing: 21/07/2025Pronounced: 21/07/2025

ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 19/11/2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

An assessment order came to be passed on 28/12/2019 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain addition u/s 69C of the Act. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 19/11/2024 vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 19/11/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided on the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de- novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment orderin accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.

6. In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →