JOGENDRA LAL KHANNA,NAINITAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BAJPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 909/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun06 February 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL (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 restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, noting the possibility of communication gaps. The assessee was granted three opportunities to present their case, bearing the risk and responsibility.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 challenged an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) which affirmed the AO's disallowance/addition. The CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee due to non-appearance and lack of explanation or evidence.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was whether the ex-parte order by the CIT(A) was justified given the possibility of communication gaps, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN “SMC” BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 16.01.2026Pronounced: 06.02.2026
1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/JCIT(A)- 1, Surat’s DIN and order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025- 26/1078040670(1), dated 30.06.2025, involving proceedings under sections 143(3) 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 the learned CIT(A)/NFAC in its order has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowance/addition herein.

3.

The Revenue argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)/NFAC’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case.

4.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands and is of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer, auditor and the arguing counsel could not be altogether ruled out.

5.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective

2 | P a g e opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →