SUDHIR CHAWLA,DEHRADUN vs. ACIT, C.C., HALDWANI, HALDWANI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 87/DDN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 November 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders as the Assessee did not participate in the proceedings due to imprisonment. To uphold the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the issue to the AO for de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The Assessee's appeals were filed against orders from the CIT(A) for Assessment Years 2013-14, 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2017-18, and an order for AY 2014-15. The Assessee's counsel argued that the Assessee was imprisoned during assessment proceedings, violating natural justice principles. The Departmental Representative contended that the Assessee was not in prison at the time of the search.

What were the issues?

Violation of principles of natural justice due to ex-parte orders passed when the assessee was imprisoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

Hearing: 11/11/2025Pronounced: 14/11/2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 88/DDN/2025
ITA No. 90/DDN/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18 and order dated 20/03/2025 pertaining to A.Y 2014-15.

2.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee was under imprisonment at the time of assessment proceedings, therefore, the Assessee could not appear before the A.O. and also before the Ld. respective orders in violation of principals of natural justice, thus, sought for allowing the Appeals.

3.

Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that as on the date of search, the Assessee was not in prison and he was in prison after the date of search. As the Assessee has not participated in the proceedings before the A.O. as well as before the Ld. CIT(A), Assessee cannot find fault with the authorities below in passing the orders impugned. Thus, sought for dismissal of the captioned Appeals.

4.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. It is a matter of fact the Assessee was imprisoned at the time of assessment proceedings, which ultimately resulted in passing the ex-parte orders by the authorities below. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment orderin accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.

5.

In the result, the Appeals of the Appellant are partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →