PREETAM JAISWAL,INDORE V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JHABUA, JHABUA

ITA 315/IND/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Preetam Jaiswal, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, which confirmed the additions made by the Income Tax Officer, Jhabua, in the assessment order for the year 2016-17. The CIT(A) had decided the first appeal ex-parte as the assessee did not make any submissions despite multiple opportunities. The ITAT found that the CIT(A)'s decision did not adequately address the grounds raised by the assessee and remanded the case for a fresh adjudication, emphasizing the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833948 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 31-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORASSESSEESUBMITSTHATTHECIT A HASDECIDEDFIRSTAPPEAL; FORREVENUEAGREESWITHTHEPRAYEROFLD.ARBUTMAKESA; SHRIASHISHPORWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIARPIT GAUR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 5 आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौरɊायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.315/Ind/2025 Assessment Year:2016-17 Preetam Jaiswal, 138, Prime City, Veena Nagar NX, Indore बनाम/ Vs. ITO Jhabua (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN:ACVPJ7560P Assessee by Shri Arpit Gaur, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 06.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal bearing DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071816101(1) dated 02.01.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 24.12.2018 passed by learned ITO, Jhabua [“AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2016-17, the assessee has filed this appeal on following grounds: Printed from counselvise.com Preetam Jaiswal ITA No. 315/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17 Page 2 of 5 Printed from counselvise.com Preetam Jaiswal ITA No. 315/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17 Page 3 of 5 2. Ld. AR for assessee submits that the CIT(A) has decided first-appeal ex-parte qua assessee for the reason that the assessee did not make any submission before him despite opportunities given. He further submits that the CIT(A) has simply confirmed the order passed by AO and thereby upheld the additions but the grounds/issues raised by assessee in first appeal requires an apt adjudication by CIT(A) on merit in accordance with provisions of 250(6) of the Act which provides “The order of the Printed from counselvise.com Preetam Jaiswal ITA No. 315/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17 Page 4 of 5 Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. Referring to Para 4.1 of impugned order, Ld. AR demonstrates that the CIT(A) has given four opportunities on 29.01.2021, 10.08.2022, 17.08.2022 and 23.08.2022. The assessee filed adjournment request against hearing fixed on 23.08.2022 which the CIT(A) granted. But thereafter the CIT(A) fixed next hearing after two years’ period on 13.12.2024 which the assessee missed to attend. Therefore, there occurred non-representation before CIT(A). Ld. AR acknowledges that the assessee is ready and willing to make a proper representation before CIT(A) if an opportunity is given and prays that the present matter should be remanded to CIT(A) for an apt adjudication. 3. Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. 4. In view of above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of CIT(A), we remand this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh, at the risk and responsibility of assessee. The CIT(A) shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) Printed from counselvise.com Preetam Jaiswal ITA No. 315/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17 Page 5 of 5 and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 5. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open court on 06.02.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक/Dated : 06.02.2026. Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "