SHYAM BHANDULA,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 45(4), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6808/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 November 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps in the faceless hearing system and, in the interest of justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was given opportunities to present their case, subject to their own risk.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 arose against the CIT(A)'s order which was passed ex-parte. The CIT(A) affirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowances/additions. The assessee contended that there were communication gaps due to the faceless hearing system.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, considering potential communication gaps in the faceless assessment system. Whether the appeal should be restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

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: Ms. Kriti Bindal, CA (through
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 27.11.2025Pronounced: 27.11.2025

2017-18 arises against CIT(A)/ JCIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam’s order dated 28.08.2025 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1080082819(1), in proceedings u/s 143(3) 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →