CHAUDIYALA SADHAN SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITE,ROORKEE vs. ITO W 1 3 6 ROORKEE, ROORKEE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 89/DDN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) orders were ex-parte and the CIT(A) did not decide all grounds on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issue was restored to the AO for de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order which dismissed their appeal. The assessment order was passed ex-parte under Section 144 as the assessee did not participate in the proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities without deciding all grounds on merits should be set aside and the matter restored for fresh assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 08/07/2025Pronounced: 08/07/2025

Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 08/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 08/07/2025 ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)’/NFAC’ for short), Delhi dated 10/05/2024for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

An assessment order came to be passed on 26/09/2019 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed vide order impugned dated 10/05/2024.

As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

3.

None appeared for the Assessee. Considering the issue involved in the present Appeal, we deem it fit to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and perused the material available on record.

4.

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.

5.

We have heard the Department's Representative 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 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 assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.

6. In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →