JUBILIANT ENPRO (P) LTD.,NOIDA vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3198/DEL/2011Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 February 2025AY 2008-09Bench: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the matter required a de novo assessment. The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had not decided the issue on merit and had affirmed the ex-parte order of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the Tribunal remitted the issues back to the file of the Assessing Officer with directions to decide the same afresh. The Assessing Officer was directed to give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Ld. DR of the Revenue had no objection to this direction. The assessee was directed to fully cooperate with the Assessing Officer during the proceedings. The Tribunal explicitly stated that the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Archana Saluja, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi, dated 28.02.2025, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal. The Revenue was represented by Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution, despite being granted several opportunities. The Ld. CIT(A)'s order affirmed the Assessing Officer's order, which was also passed ex-parte. The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution without deciding the issue on merit, thereby affirming an ex-parte order of the Assessing Officer? (Question of law and fact, relating to procedural fairness and principles of natural justice). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded as none appeared. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities, implying that the dismissal by the Ld. CIT(A) was justified based on the assessee's failure to prosecute the appeal.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT DR
Hearing: 24.09.2025

Order

: 24.09.2025 O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-30, New Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 28.02.2025 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We proceeded to adjudicate the issue with the assistance of ld. DR of the Revenue.

3.

At the time of hearing, it was observed that that the ld. CIT (A) decided the issue against the assessee by observing that assessee has not pursued the appeal despite being granted several opportunities and the details are given in the first appellate order, accordingly dismissed the appeal. It is observed that ld. CIT (A) has not decided the issue on merit and affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer who has also passed the order ex-parte. Ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

4.

We have considered the submissions of the ld. DR of the Revenue and perused the material on record. Upon careful consideration, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter requires denovo assessment. Therefore, we remit back the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which Ld. DR has no objection. Assessee is directed to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 24h day of September, 2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →