BIKASH KUMAR SINGH,RANCHI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RANCHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that both the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were passed ex parte without adjudicating the issues on merits. In the interest of justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to present their case.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return for AY 2014-15, which was initially accepted. The assessment was reopened under Section 148, and additions were made due to non-compliance. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), but the appeal was dismissed ex parte for non-prosecution.
What were the issues?
Whether the lower authorities erred by passing ex parte orders without proper adjudication of the issues on merits, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH-RANCHI
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay
order
: February 11, 2026 ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 29.08.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2014–15, declaring total income of ₹38,61,970. The case was selected for scrutiny, and assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was completed on 15.12.2016, accepting the returned income at ₹38,61,970. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. However, the assessee did not comply with the notice issued under section 148. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer made additions of ₹12,88,048 and ₹34,77,395 to the income of the assessee on account of unexplained items, and completed the reassessment by determining the total income at ₹86,27,413, as against the originally returned income of ₹38,61,970.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). However, due to non-prosecution on various dates of hearing, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte and sustained the reassessment order, without adjudicating the issues on merits.
Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the orders of the lower authorities were passed ex parte and prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to present his case and substantiate his claims. On the other hand, the learned DR submitted that the assessee had repeatedly failed to appear before the authorities and supported the impugned order.
We, after hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record, we find that both the assessment order and the appellate order have been passed ex parte, without proper adjudication of the issues on merits. In our considered view, in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present his case. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication of all the issues, after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to comply with all notices and to cooperate in the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 11th February, 2026.
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Zakir Hussain Ali Khan vs. Additional Commissioner (Appeals), BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026