Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2020-21, 2021-22, and 2023-24. The CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, affirming the Assessing Officer's disallowances/additions. The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the appeals were proceeded ex-parte due to the assessee's absence. Considering the possibility of communication gaps, the Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in proceeding ex-parte and whether the appeals should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication due to potential communication gaps.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Date of hearing 01.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 01.12.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s three appeals 4986 & 4987/Del/2025 for assessment years 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2023- 24, arise against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], New Delhi’s orders, all dated 20.06.2025, having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/M/250/2025- 26/1077452197(1), ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1077452465(1) and ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1077454743(1) involving , 4986 & 4987/Del/2025. proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) 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)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) 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 , 4986 & 4987/Del/2025. instant appeals back to the CIT(A) for it’s 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.