Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-21 challenged an ex-parte order from the NFAC/CIT(A) which arose from an assessment under Section 147 r.w.s. 144. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte due to non-service of notices and requested the matter be restored for fresh adjudication to present additional documents.
Held
The tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and non-speaking, violating principles of natural justice. It restored the matter to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, directing a speaking order after providing the assessee sufficient opportunity to be heard and present evidence.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee violated principles of natural justice, warranting a remand for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 144, Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI
ORDER Per.Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2020- 21, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 05.12.2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, on 06.03.2025.
At the outset itself, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle Dhimant Jayantilal Kotecha of natural justice. Hence, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, prayed the Bench that now the assessee wants to submit some additional documents and evidences before Ld. CIT(A), therefore, matter may be restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) as the notices were not served on the assessee, however, there was compliance before the assessing officer. Therefore, Ld. Counsel contended that an opportunity should be granted to the assessee to plead his case before Ld. CIT(A), as the assessee wants to submit some additional documents to prove his claim.
On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue, did not have any objection, if the matter is restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex-parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.
Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to Dhimant Jayantilal Kotecha contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 12/01/2026