KAVERY BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

ITA 3315/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Kavery Buildwell Pvt Ltd, the appellant, contesting an ex parte order passed by the Assessing Officer under sections 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2012-13. The appellant argued that their requests for adjournment were not considered and that they were not given a fair opportunity to present their case, which constituted a violation of natural justice. The Departmental Representative contended that the CIT(A) was justified in deciding against the assessee due to their failure to respond to the notices. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments and restored the case to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 791130 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANKUSH KALRA
• Assessee Lawyers: DE V ASHISH A MEHROTRA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3315/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2012-13] Kavery Buildwell Pvt Ltd Vs. The I.T.O 201. Arunachal Ward -14(2) 18, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi PAN – AACCK 5526 E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devashish A Mehrotra, Adv Shri Sarvesh Kumar Srivastava Department By : Ms. Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.12.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 21.03.2025 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3315/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2012-13] Kavery Buildwell Vs. ITO Page 2 of 4 2. At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended before us that the Assessing Officer passed an ex parte order u/s 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act, for short]. Neither the Assessing Officer nor the ld. CIT(A) have addressed the additional ground filed by the assessee. It is the say of the ld AR that the application for adjournment filed by the assessee have not been considered by the NFAC/ld. CIT(A). The ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the ld. CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order without providing reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the principles of natural justice were violated as the ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order without granting proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 3. Per contra, the ld. DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) was right in deciding the appeal against the assessee as the assessee has not filed any reply to the notices issued. 4. In rejoinder, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the concerned person who was looking after the tax matters of the assessee was suffering from paralytic attack and hence he was unable to file any response before the Assessing Officer. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3315/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2012-13] Kavery Buildwell Vs. ITO Page 3 of 4 5. We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee failed to respond to the notices and file any reply. We find that the assessee had sought adjournment which was not considered. In the above factual matrix of the instant case, we are of the considered view that the assessee ought to have been given sufficient opportunity of being heard. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issues afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering all the documents/evidence. The assessee is also directed to provide necessary information/ documents as required by the ld. CIT(A). 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 3315/DEL/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 10.12.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 10th December, 2025. VL/ Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3315/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2012-13] Kavery Buildwell Vs. ITO Page 4 of 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) Asst. Registrar, 5. DR ITAT, New Delhi Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order 2. Date on which the typed draft order is placed before the Dictating Member 3. Date on which the typed draft order is placed before the other Member [in case of DB] 4. Date on which the approved draft order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Order is placed before the Dictating Member for sign 6. Date on which the fair order is placed before the other Member for sign [in case of DB] 7. Date on which the Order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S for uploading on ITAT website 8. Date of uploading, inf not, reason for not uploading 9. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 10. Date on which the file goes for Xerox 11. Date on which the file goes for endorsement 12. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 13. Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 14. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section for dispatch the Tribunal order 15. Date of Dispatch of the Order 16. Date on which the file goes to the Record Room after dispatch the order Printed from counselvise.com "