RAJESH BUILDHOMES PVT. LTD. ,INDORE vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). The matter was remanded for proper adjudication on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee sought adjournments from the CIT(A) to compile necessary documents, but the request was rejected, leading to an ex-parte order. The assessee argued that the request for adjournment was genuine and prayed for a remand.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in rejecting the assessee's request for adjournment and passing an ex-parte order. The primary issue is providing an opportunity for a proper hearing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI
आदेश / O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 21.02.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 24.09.2021 passed by learned NFAC, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2014-15, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
Rajesh Buildhomes Pvt. Limited, Indore. - AY 2014-15
Ld. AR for assessee drew us to Para 5 to 7 of impugned order to show that the assessee sought adjournments from CIT(A) as the compilation of desired details and documents was underway and needed some more time for preparation and proper presentation. However, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected assessee’s request for adjournment and passed impugned order ex-parte qua assessee on the basis of AO’s order and Form No. 35. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee made genuine request for adjournment and the CIT(A) ought to have accepted assessee’s request. Ld. AR further submits that the assessee is ready and willing to make representation before CIT(A) if an opportunity is given and prays that the present matter should be remanded to the file of CIT(A) for a proper adjudication of the grounds/issues raised by assessee in first-appeal. Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent its case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.
In view of above and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit to give one more opportunity to assessee so that the assessee can represent its case before CIT(A) for a proper adjudication. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for a proper adjudication on merit after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, uninfluenced by his earlier order in any manner. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
Rajesh Buildhomes Pvt. Limited, Indore. - AY 2014-15
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
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 →- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026