RAJ KUMAR,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO WARD 1(2)(2), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 356/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)1 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) did not decide the issue on merit and affirmed an ex-parte order without proper adjudication. The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision on merit after providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for not pursuing the appeal despite opportunities. The CIT(A) affirmed the Assessing Officer's ex-parte order. The assessee challenged this dismissal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding the issue on merit. Whether an opportunity of being heard should be granted to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Shri Arvind Dutt Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11.09.2025

(Assessment Year: 2017-18) Raj Kumar, vs. ITO, Ward 1 (2)(2), 485/8, Subhash Nagar, Meerut. Meerut – 250 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : ABJPK4296J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Arvind Dutt Sharma, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11.09.2025 Date of Order : 11.09.2025 O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [for short ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated 01.12.2023 for Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the ld. CIT (A) decided the issue against the assessee by observing that assessee has not pursued the appeal despite being granted several opportunities and the details are given in the first appellate order and dismissed the appeal. It is observed that ld. CIT (A) has not decided the issue on merit and affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer who has also passed the order ex-parte.

3.

On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee and submitted that assessee has not utilised several opportunities granted by ld. CIT (A).

4.

Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observe that ld. CIT (A) decided the issue against the assessee by observing that assessee has not pursued the appeal despite being granted several opportunities and Assessing Officer also decided the issues ex-parte. In our considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we restore the matter to the file of Assessing Officer and direct the Assessing Officer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue on merit as per law. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the Assessing Officer on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 11TH day of September, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →