REETA GOYAL,DEHRADUN V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1(1)(3) DEHRADUN/, DEHRADUN

ITA 283/DDN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals filed by Reeta Goyal against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)/NFAC), New Delhi, which were dated 14/10/2025 for the Assessment Years 2017-18 and 2019-20. The appeals were against the assessment orders passed under sections 147 read with section 144 and section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which made certain additions to the Assessee's income. The primary contention of the Assessee was that both the orders from the A.O. and the CIT(A) were ex-parte and violated the principles of natural justice as the CIT(A) did not decide on all the grounds of the appeals on their merits. The Department's Representative argued that the Assessee was a chronic defaulter who did not appear before the lower authorities, justifying the ex-parte orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 838078 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 31-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act of 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMAR PAL SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAHUL JAIN; APPLICATION ADJOURNMENT
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"1 ITA Nos. 279 & 283/DDN/2025 Reeta Goyal Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 279/DDN/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18) (DDN) ITA No. 283/DDN/2025 (A.Y. 2019-20) (SMC) Reeta Goyal 55, NalaPani Road, Dehradun, Uttarakhand PAN: AHYPG4217C Vs Income Tax officer Ward 1(1) (3) Dehradun, Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee by CA Rahul Jain, Application for adjournment filed-Application rejected Revenue by Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement 18/02/2026 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The captioned Appeals are filed by the Assessee against the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 14/10/2025 for the Assessment Years 2017-18 and 2019-20 respectively. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment orders came to be passed on 31/01/2025 and on 19/03/2024 u/s 147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) respectively for Assessment Year 2017-18 and 2019-20 by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred two Appeals before the Ld. CIT(A) which were dismissed on 14/10/2025 vide orders impugned. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA Nos. 279 & 283/DDN/2025 Reeta Goyal Vs. ITO As against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 14/10/2025, Assessee preferred the present Appeals. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided on the grounds of the Appeals of the Assessee and the order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal. 4. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the orders of the A.O. as well as orders of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessments. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA Nos. 279 & 283/DDN/2025 Reeta Goyal Vs. ITO being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment orders in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail. 6. In the result, the Appeals of the Appellant are partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th February, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY AWASTHI) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 18 .02.2026 Reshma Naheed, 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 "