BADIANI PRATAP JETHALAL(HUF),JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(ASSESSMENT UNIT), DELHI
Facts
The assessment for AY 2013-14 was carried out u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), but the resulting order was ex-parte and non-speaking, as the assessee claimed they were denied sufficient opportunity to present their case or submit additional evidence due to circumstances beyond their control.
Held
The Tribunal determined that the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice by not providing the assessee adequate opportunity to be heard or to submit necessary details and documents. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh *de novo* adjudication, with directions to afford the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee to present their case constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice, warranting remission of the matter for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI
आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोट�ायपीठ,राजकोट। राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 443/RJT/2025 (�नधा�रणवष� �नधा�रणवष�/Assessment Year: (2013-14) Badlani Pratap Jethalal (HUF) Badlani Pratap Jethalal (HUF) The Income Tax Officer, NFAC, The Income Tax Officer, NFAC, 1st Floor, Modern Market, Pandit Nehru Floor, Modern Market, Pandit Nehru Vs. Delhi, 4th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Marg, Nr. Amber Cinema Connaught Circus, Jamnagar – 361008 New Delhi - 110001 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: PAN/GIR No.: AABHB4073P (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Om S. Modi, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. , Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 15/09/2025 : 17/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement Pronouncement ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: . Arjun Lal Saini, AM:
The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated dated 16.05.2025 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s. 14 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2013-14.
At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and
ITA No. 443/Rjt/2025 Badlani Pratap Jethalal
the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has neither appeared before the assessing officer nor before the Ld. assessee has neither appeared before the assessing officer nor before the Ld. assessee has neither appeared before the assessing officer nor before the Ld. CIT(A), due to circumstances beyond his control, now the assessee wants to CIT(A), due to circumstances beyond his control, now the assessee wants to CIT(A), due to circumstances beyond his control, now the assessee wants to submit additional evidences to pro submit additional evidences to prove its claim, therefore, matter may be remitted ve its claim, therefore, matter may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication.
On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue he ld. DR for the Revenue relied on the finding of the relied on the finding of the assessing officer.
I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth 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 on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws 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 relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non- and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non speaking order, therefore, I do do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee grounds raised by the assessee.
Considering the above facts, Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. 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 note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits 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 based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. The assessee has participated in appellate proceedings and sought The assessee has participated in appellate proceedings and sought The assessee has participated in appellate proceedings and sought adjournment during the appellate proceedings to file details and documents, the appellate proceedings to file details and documents, the appellate proceedings to file details and documents, however, Ld. CIT(A) did not allow further time to the assessee. however, Ld. CIT(A) did not allow further time to the assessee. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected 2
ITA No. 443/Rjt/2025 Badlani Pratap Jethalal
party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. pportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, pportunity of being heard to contest his case. without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, restore the matter back to the file of restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer for de novo adjudication and adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the 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. assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. I hold and assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. direct accordingly. The assessing officer assessing officer will afford opportunity of be will afford opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in further evidence to substantiate it her evidence to substantiate its case. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the fil aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the fil assessing officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, 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 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
Order is pronounced in the open court on Order is pronounced in the open court on 17/09/2025.
Sd/- (DR. A. L. SAINI) SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट/Rajkot (True Copy) िदनांक/ Date: 17/09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, RAJKOT 6. Guard File By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot ITAT, Rajkot
