ZAKIR HUSSAIN,JHANSI vs. ITO-2(3)(1), JHANSI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, directing that the assessee be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard and allowed to furnish further evidence. The CIT(A) was instructed to decide the issues on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against ex-parte assessment orders for AYs 2016-17 to 2018-19, with a delay of 516 days. The CIT(A) had decided the issues ex parte without adjudicating on merits. The tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals.
What were the issues?
The key legal issue was the ex-parte disposal of appeals by the CIT(A) without a decision on merits, and the condonation of a significant delay in filing appeals before the ITAT.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH “SMC”: AGRA
Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH
549 & 550/AGR/2025 for AY 2016-17 to 2018-19, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 18.04.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 28.03.2022 and 30.04.2022 by the Assessing Officer, ITD, NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).
At the outset, I find that there is a delay in filing of appeals before us 516 days by the assessee. Considering the reason adduced in the condonation petition, I hold that the assessee was having sufficient cause in not filing the appeals in time and accordingly the appeals of the assessee are hereby admitted for adjudication. to 550/AGR/2025 Zakir Hussain 3. On perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A), I find that the ld CIT(A) had decided the issues ex parte without adjudicating the issue on merits giving its independent finding. Hence, in the interest of justice and fairplay, I deem it fit and appropriate to restore this appeal to file of ld CIT(A) for de novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that the assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is at liberty to furnish further evidences and additional grounds, if any, in support of his contentions. The assessee is directed to cooperate with ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal by not taking unwarranted adjournments except due to exceptional or bonafide circumstances. Hence, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23/01/2026.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026