Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) for AY 2017-18. The assessee's counsel contended that both the appellate order and the original assessment order were passed without a proper hearing.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) and the AO had passed orders ex-parte due to the assessee's non-response to notices. To serve the ends of justice, the appeal was restored to the file of the AO to decide the matter afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) and AO passed orders ex-parte without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 14.11.2025 for the AY 2017-18.
At the outset, the Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Appellate Order as well as AO’s order were passed by the authorities ex-parte without hearing the assessee when the assessee failed to respond to various notices issued by these authorities. The
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials on record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellant order ex-parte when the assessee failed to respond to various notices issued during appellate proceedings. Similarly, the AO passed ex-parte assessment when the assessee did not respond to the notices issued during assessment proceedings. Therefore, the End of justice will be well-served, if the appeal is restored to the file of AO. Accordingly, we restore the appeal back to the file of AO with a direction to decide the same afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 06.03.2026.