TURNER RECREATIONS (P) LTD,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 25(3), NEW 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 Tribunal observed that the impugned order did not properly record the mode of service of notices and proceeded to dismiss the appeal without adjudicating on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes and restored it to the NFAC for fresh notice and disposal.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the NFAC for non-prosecution. The assessee contended that notices were not served on the email provided in Form 35. The impugned order mentioned the issue of notice but did not record the mode of service or confirm due service before dismissing the appeal on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal was rightly dismissed for non-prosecution without proper service of notice and adjudication on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, DELHI
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.06.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No.
ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077889614(1) arising out of the order dated 29.03.2025 passed u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward 25(3) (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO) for AY: 2017-18.
On hearing both the sides, we find that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by NFAC on the ground of non prosecution. The Ld. Counsel submits that the notices were not served on the email provided in Form 35.
Perusal of the impugned order shows that though there is mention of issue of notice for hearing, however, mode of service of the notices and the finding that they were duly served is not recorded and thereafter without going on merits the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.
In the light of the aforesaid, we are inclined to allow the appeal for statistical purposes. The appeal is restored to the file of Ld. First Appellate Authority/JCIT(A) for fresh notice and disposal of the appeal in accordance with law.
Order pronounced in the open court on 05.12.2025
More judgments on Section 147
- 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
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
