SAHASPUR KISHAN SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that both the assessment orders and the CIT(A) orders were ex-parte, and the CIT(A) had not decided all grounds on merits. In the interest of justice, the matters were restored to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessments, with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard and produce documents.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against assessment orders passed under Section 147 read with Section 144. The assessee contended that the lower authorities violated principles of natural justice as they could not participate in the proceedings. The appeals were filed with a delay of 57 days, which was condoned.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessment orders and CIT(A) orders were passed in violation of principles of natural justice due to the assessee's non-participation and whether the CIT(A) decided all grounds of appeal on merits.
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 YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Sahaspur Kishan Sewa Vs. Income Tax Officer Sahkari Samiti Limited WAerd-1(1) (3) Sahaspur, Vikas Nagar , Income Tax Office Dehradun 248001 Dehraudn Uttarakhand PAN: AAWHS5244N Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Roman Jain, CA Revenue by Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 08/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 16/07/2025 ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
The above captioned Appeals are filed by the Assessee against the orders of CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld.
CIT(A)’/NFAC’ for short), Delhi dated 25/07/2024, 26/07/2024 and 26/07/2024pertaining to Assessment Year 2015-16, 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively.
There is a delay of 57 days in filing the captioned Appeals. The Assessee contended that the reason for delay was due to change in staff as well as the assessment order have been received on spam mail which could not be seen on time. Therefore, there is a delay in filing the present Appeal. For the reasons stated in the application for condondation of the delay, delay of 57 days in filing the above appeals are hereby condoned.
Facts in brief are that, the assessment orders have been passed u/s u/s 147 read with Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions in 2015-16, 2018-19 and 2019-20.The Assessee preferred three separate Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) by challenging the respective assessment orders, which have been dismissed vide orders impugned. As against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the captioned Appeals.
The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the orders impugned of the Ld. CIT(A) has been passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Further submitted that even before the assessment proceedings A.O., assessee could not participate and submit requisite documents, thus, submitted that both the Lower Authorities have violated principals of natural justice. Therefore, sought for allowing the Appeal.
The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the orders 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 and even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. 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 assessments. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment orders in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate and produce requisite documents before the A.O. in the assessment proceedings.
7. In the result, the Appeals of the Appellant are partly 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 →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026