ARAVALI INDUSTRIES LIMITED,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 3(1), DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) observed that the NFAC order was non-speaking and effectively dismissed the appeal in limine without granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the impugned order and remanded the issues back to the First Appellate Authority for de novo adjudication, with directions to provide the assessee a proper hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Aravali Industries Limited, appealed against an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for the assessment year 2017-18. The core grievance was the ex parte disposal of their appeal by the First Appellate Authority, where the assessee claimed no notice of hearing was received, leading to the appeal being dismissed without merits.
What were the issues?
Did the First Appellate Authority err in dismissing the assessee's appeal ex parte without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard and without deciding the case on merits?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA
O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, V.P.:
This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 01.08.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017- 18.
We have heard the parties and perused materials on record. The limited grievance of the assessee is against the ex parte disposal of its appeal by the First Appellate Authority without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard.
2.1 On perusing the impugned order of the First Appellate Authority, it is observed that though the First Appellate Authority has stated that various notices
2 of hearing were issued to the assessee, however, no such detail is mentioned in the appellate order. It is the specific case of the assessee before us that it had never received any notice of hearing from the First Appellate Authority in its e-mail ID. It is further observed from the observations of the First Appellate Authority in para 5.1 of the impugned order that he has virtually dismissed assessee’s appeal in limine as the order is thoroughly non-speaking without discussing the facts and issues arising in the appeal. Thus, in our considered opinion, the appeal of the assessee was not decided on merits by learned First Appellate Authority. In view of the aforesaid, we set aside the impugned order of learned First Appellate Authority and restore the issues arising in the appeal back to him for de novo adjudication after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Resultantly, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 04.04.2024.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
