TULSI INFRAHEIGHTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 541/AGR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Agra25 March 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order after the assessee repeatedly sought adjournments instead of making submissions. To ensure natural justice, the tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after providing the assessee an opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income, which was later selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment, making additions to the declared income. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal, confirming some additions and deleting others.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order when the assessee repeatedly sought adjournments, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity for hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (DB

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.02.2026Pronounced: 18.02.2026

ORDER This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 24.09.2025 passed in appeal No CIT (Appeal) 2, Agra/10541/2019-20 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2017-18, wherein ld CIT(A) has partly allowed assessee’s appeal, confirming part of the additions and deleting in part.

2.

The brief facts state that the assessee filed return of income, declaring total income of Rs. 77,20,890 on 31.03.2018. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Later on, the return was selected for scrutiny through (CASS). Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. Assessee’s representative filed reply alongwith the documentary evidence before the A.O. After considering assessee’s response, ld A.O. completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act and assessed total income at Rs. 2,74,46,240/- vide order dated 31.12.2019.

3.

Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal against the assessment order before ld CIT(A), who partly allowed assessee’s appeal as stated in above terms.

4.

Appellant assessee has approached this tribunal on the ground that ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the part of said additions ex-parte.

5.

Perused the records. Assessee’s prayer for adjournment was rejected. Heard ld representative for the assessee and ld. Sr. DR for the respondent.

6.

We notice that ld CIT(A) issued notices on 29.01.2021, 22.05.2025, 04.06.2025, 13.06.2025, 02.07.2025 and 14.07.2025 to the assessee for making submissions. Assessee, instead of making required submissions, kept on moving adjournments on all above dates fixed for compliance. Assessee also filed adjournments on 10.09.2025, which was rejected by the ld CIT(A) and passed ex-parte impugned order. In the interest of 2 | P a g e justice, we deem it just and proper to affrord an opportunity of hearing to the assessee before ld CIT(A). We, therefore, remit the matter back to the file of ld CIT(A), who shall pass order on merit afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say that ld CIT(A) shall ensure the substantial compliance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →