SH.CHETAN SHARMA,NOIDA vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-7, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2461/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 October 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)4 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 found that the CIT(A) erred by deciding the appeal ex-parte without affording the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an order of the CIT(A) for AY 2018-19. The CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte without granting an adjournment requested by the assessee, despite the assessee having filed a petition for the same.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) correctly decided the appeal ex-parte without granting an adjournment and providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘B’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Pooja Swaroop, CIT- DR
Hearing: 16.09.2025

PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-24, Delhi, Delhi dated 27.02.2025 pertaining to A.Y 2018-19. 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee in this appeal is that the CIT(A) issued notice to which the assessee had filed a petition seeking mentioned the petition seeking adjournment in order and decided the issue ex parte without giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

1.

It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(A) confirmed ex-parte, the order of the AO, who framed the assessment u/s 153C qua the assessee without assuming proper jurisdiction and recording mandatory ‘satisfaction’ in accordance with law u/s 153C of the Act. The ld. counsel for the assessee prayed to restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

3.

The ld. DR did not raise any serious objection.

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the assessee had filed application seeking adjournment before the CIT(A) but the ld. CIT(A) considered that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal and consequently he decided the issues ex-parte.

5.

We therefore, are of the considered view that in the interest of justice and fair play, the instant case and the impugned order of the CIT(A) be set aside and the issues emanating out of the assessment order be restored to the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per law. The ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal

Page 2 of 4 heard to the assessee and considering the evidences/material furnished by the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings and furnish documents/evidence as required by the ld.

CIT(A). allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 10.10.2025.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →