Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals & 4062/Del/2025 for assessment year 2018-19, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s orders, both dated 25.04.2025 having DINs and orders no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1075821791(1) and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1075821440(1), involving proceedings under section 270 and 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC in its order has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowance/addition herein.
The Revenue argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)/NFAC’s findings that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting his case.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A)/NFAC has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer, auditor and the arguing counsel could not be altogether ruled out.
Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s
2 | P a g e instant appeals back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. The assessee’s “quantum” appeal is accepted for statistical purposes. Same order to follow in the assessee’s “penalty” appeal being consequential in nature.