SH. M.L. AGARWALLA,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the CIT(A)'s file. The CIT(A) was directed to pass a fresh order after giving the assessee a proper opportunity to be heard.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 68. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition through an ex-parte order without providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity of hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-1’, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
Date of Hearing : 14.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 15.09.2016 ORDER
This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-16, New Delhi on 24.03.2015 in relation to the Assessment Year 2011-12.
The fourth ground of appeal is against the passing of the ex-parte order by the Ld. CIT(A) without granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) made an addition of Rs.5,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition by means of an ex parte order. Having regard to the facts of the instant case and the reasons advanced by the Ld. A.R. for the absence of the assessee during the course of first appellate proceedings, with which I am satisfied, it is considered expedient that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A). I order accordingly. The Ld.CIT(A) is directed to pass the order afresh after affording the assessee a due opportunity of hearing.
In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order pronounced in the open court on 15.09.2016.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- 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
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
