SUMITRA BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS (P) LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT TDS CIRCLE-75(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4818/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 November 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's submissions. In the interest of natural justice, the assessee was granted another opportunity to file submissions.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an order passed by the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2013-14. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing an adequate opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by passing an ex-parte order without providing the assessee adequate opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1),Section 201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘C’: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash Sr. DR
Hearing: 19.11.2025Pronounced: 19.11.2025

ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM:

Appeal in this case has been filed against the order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/Addl./JCIT(A)-5, Mumbai, for Assessment Year 2013-14

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, CIT(A) erred in disposing off the appeal without providing the Assessee proper / adequate opportunity of being heard. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, CIT(A) erred in confirming sums charges u/s.201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act amounting to Rs.43,46,100/ - & Rs.40,85,334/ - respectively.”

3.

At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee brought it to the notice of the Bench that the ld. CIT(A) has passed this order without bringing on record the submission of the assessee. Thus, it is an ex-parte order without considering the assessee’s side of arguments.

4.

Per Contra, ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

5.

We have considered the findings given by the ld. CIT(A) in his order and we find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without taking on record the submission of the assessee on the issue of addition made by the Assessing Officer. Keeping in view of natural justice, we find that the assessee should be given another opportunity to file his submissions to the ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) should pass order on merit after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee as required in the law. Accordingly, this appeal is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A)

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th November, 2025.

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →