RANJANA GUSAIN,DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4165/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 October 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (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 acknowledged that proceedings were ex-parte and considered the possibility of communication gaps due to the faceless hearing system. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose against an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The lower authorities had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, making additions on account of sale consideration and cash deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment proceedings and additions made by the lower authorities were justified, and if not, whether the case should be restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 28.10.2025Pronounced: 28.10.2025

Date of hearing 28.10.2025 Date of pronouncement 28.10.2025 ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075897667(1), dated 30.04.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby adding the alleged sale consideration of Rs.83.50 lakhs as capital gains along with cash depositS of Rs.10,24,370/-; respectively. The Revenue vehemently supports both the learned lower authorities’ action making the impugned additions herein on merits.

3.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since both the learned lower authorities have proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer, her auditor, and arguing counsel; as the case may be, involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.

4.

Faced with these situations in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the learned Assessing Officer for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider

2 | P a g e that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. All other issues are kept open at this stage.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →