ARUN KUMAR MURARKA , WEST DELHI vs. ITO WARD 36 (1) , NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6771/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 December 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps due to the new faceless hearing system. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2013-14 arose against the CIT(A)/NFAC's order which affirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowances/additions. The lower appellate order had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC was justified and if the appeal should be restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Kumar Jain, CA
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 27.11.2025Pronounced: 27.11.2025

2013-14 arises against CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s order dated 28.08.2025 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1080124213(1), in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion of the lower appellate order has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions herein.

3.

Learned DR vehemently 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 and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

4.

This tribunal has given thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and is of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.

5.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, this tribunal deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on 27.11.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →