PRABHUDAS GIRDHARLAL RADHANPURA,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO WARD 2 (1) (3), RAJKOT, RAJKOT
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order passed by the CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee contended that they could not represent their case before the Ld. CIT(A) because the notices were not delivered, leading to an ex-parte order. The Ld. Counsel requested that the matter be remitted back for fresh adjudication.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to be heard and the CIT(A) did not discuss the case on merits, violating the principle of natural justice. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording a proper opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice due to non-delivery of notices to the assessee and lack of opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI
आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोट�ायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं/.ITA No. 470/RJT/2025 �नधा�रणवष�/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Prabhudas Girdharlal Radhanpura Income Tax Officer, wd – 2(1)(3), End of Gundawadi, Main Road, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Rajkot - 360001 Road, PAN No.: ABSPR8523N Rajkot – 360001 (अपीलाथ�/assessee) (��यथ�/Respondent) :
�नधा�रतीक�ओरसे/Assessee by : Shri K. C. Thacker, Ld.AR राज�वक�ओरसे/Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
सुनवाईक�तार�ख /Date of Hearing : 18/09/2025 घोषणाक�तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 22/09/2025 ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 04.06.2025 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18.
At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee
ITA No. 470/RJT/2025 Prabhudas Girdhari
submitted that during the appellate proceedings, the notice from the Ld.CIT(A) were not delivered on the assessee, therefore, the assessee could not attend the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A) and could not file the documents and details before the Ld. CIT(A) and as a result the Ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order, therefore, Ld. Counsel contended that now the assessee wants, to submit documents and details before the Ld.CIT(A), hence, in the interest of justice, matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
The ld. DR for the Revenue did not raise any objection if the matter is restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 143(3) the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non- speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.
Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter
ITA No. 470/RJT/2025 Prabhudas Girdhari
back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 22/09/2025.
Sd/- (DR. A.L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट/Rajkot (True Copy) िदनांक/ Date : 22 /09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to : The assessee The Respondent CIT The CIT(A) DR, ITAT, RAJKOT Guard File /True copy/ By order
Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot
