ANUJ KAMBOJ,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD- 1(1), GURGAON
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that both the assessment orders and the CIT(A) orders were ex-parte. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the AO for de-novo assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) which dismissed their appeals against assessment orders passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) orders were also ex-parte.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the AO and CIT(A) without affording proper opportunity of being heard violated principles of natural justice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Mr. AnujKamboj Vs Income Tax Officer 602, GH 66, Sector 55, Ward-1(1) Gurgaon-122003, Haryana Gurgaon, Haryana PAN: BHHPK8728A Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. S. Krishnan, Adv, (through VC) Revenue by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 24/10/2025 ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
The above captioned appeals are filed by the Assessee against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 17/03/2025 for the Assessment Years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively.
The assessment orders came to be passed on 27/12/2021, 24/12/2021, 27/12/2021 and 24/12/2021 in respect of Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2016-17 respectively u/s 147 r.w. Section144 and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred four Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A), which have been dismissed on 17/03/2025 vide orders impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 17/03/2025, the Assessee preferred the captioned Appeals.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided on the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice.
Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not made submission in full before the A.O. and failed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, the Assessee has also remained absent before the Ld. CIT(A).
Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeals of the Assessee on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment orders in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.
In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
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 →- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
