AI SAAD TRADING CO,MEERUT V. ITO WARD-1(1)(1), MEERUT

ITA 1681/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Al Saad Trading Co., which filed appeals against the orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16. The appeals were heard by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi Bench, which admitted an additional ground of appeal concerning the ex-parte nature of the previous hearings. The assessee's representative argued that the assessee was illiterate and their counsel was unable to represent them due to illness and subsequent death. The Department's representative contended that despite various opportunities, the assessee did not comply. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and in the interest of justice, decided to set aside the issues to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669221 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Other Referred Cases: NTPC Ltd. Vs. CIT
• Laws Referred To: NTPC Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 229 ITR 383 (SC)
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N. K. BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K. SAMPAT
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1680/Del/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14) ITA No.1681/Del/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15) ITA No.1682/Del/2025 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2015- 16) M/s Al Saad Trading Co. 90, Khist Pazan, Baniya Para, Police Chowki, Meerut-250002. PAN:ALJPD48641 Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, And Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Meerut. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: All these three appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), all are dated 19.07.2023 for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2015-16 respectively. 2. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee has filed an additional ground of appeal which reads as under: “ On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Authorities below erred in completing the proceedings ex-parte without providing reasonable, adequate or proper opportunity for hearing. Such act being opposed to norms of natural justice and fair play must be quashed for directions for redoing the matter by the said Authorities.” Assessee by Shri K. Sampat, Adv. and Shri V. Rajkumar, Adv. Department by Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of hearing 24.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.06.2025 2 IT Nos.1680 to 1682 /Del/2025 Al Saad Trading Co. vs. ITO 3. In the additional ground, the Ld. AR of the assessee has challenged the order of Ld. CIT(A) who has decided the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without providing adequate opportunities for hearing. Since this additional ground of appeal is legal in nature and does not required any verification ,thus the same is admitted in terms of the order of hon’ble Supreme court in the case of NTPC Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 229 ITR 383 (SC). 4. Before us, Ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee being illiterate and the Counsel who was appearing in the matter was sick and ultimately died, therefore, the case of the assesse could not be represented before the Lower Authorities. The Ld. AR further submitted that the order of the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and, therefore, he prayed that in the interest of justice, matter may be sent back to the file of the AO to enable the assessee to file all the relevant details necessary to support the claim. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT-DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that despite of various opportunities, no compliance was made. It appears that assessee has nothing to say in support of the claim, therefore, he prayed for confirmations of the orders of the lower authorities. 6. Heard both the parties. From perusal of both the orders of the lower authorities clearly shows that despite of giving several opportunities of being heard, the assessee was not appeared either before the AO or before the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessment order as well as appellate order was passed ex- parte. 7. Before us, the Ld. AR requested for set aside the issue to the file of the AO. Considering the facts of the case that the assessee has failed to make representation before AO and CIT(A) nor had filed any details/documents to support the claim thus in the larger interest of justice, the issues in all three appeals are restored back to the file of AO to pass the order denovo fresh on merits in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunities of being 3 IT Nos.1680 to 1682 /Del/2025 Al Saad Trading Co. vs. ITO heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file all evidences in support of the claim before the AO during the set aside proceedings. 8. In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.06.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (MANISH AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 26.06.2025. PK/Sr. Ps Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi "