MADAN PAL,GHAZIABAD V. ITO WARD-2(1)(3), GHAZIABAD

ITA 3760/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Madan Pal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which dismissed his appeal without a hearing. The original assessment by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) for the Assessment Year 2015-16 significantly increased Madan Pal's declared income, leading to the appeal. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not provided a hearing to the Assessee, violating the principles of natural justice, and thus remanded the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824567 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2025
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARPREET KAUR HANSRA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 3760/Del/2025 Madan Pal Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3760/Del/2025 (A.Y 2015-16) Madan Pal Village Mehrauli, Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh PAN: AJRPP4950E Vs ITO Ward 2(1) (3), Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. Samyak Jain, Adv Revenue by Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 29/12/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 19/02/2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 28/03/2023 by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 52,27,460/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 22,98,10/- by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 28/03/2023, Assessee preferred the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 19/02/2025, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 3760/Del/2025 Madan Pal Vs. ITO 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. 4. Per contra, the Ld. Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the impugned order has been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that while deciding the Appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee on its merits. Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 6. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 29th December, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 3760/Del/2025 Madan Pal Vs. ITO Date:- 29.12.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com "