SURENDER SINGH,PANIPAT, HARYANA V. ITO, WARD-1, PANIPAT, WARD-,PANIPAT

ITA 3023/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Surender Singh against the orders passed by the lower tax authorities for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The initial orders were made ex parte due to the non-appearance of the assessee despite receiving notices under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal, recognizing the need to prevent a miscarriage of justice, decided to set aside the previous orders and remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, ensuring that the assessee is given a fair opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785034 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 3023/D/2025 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3023/DEL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Surender Singh, Near Bus Stand Madlauda, Panipat -132113. PAN: BOXPS 1667 B Vs DCIT, Circle-22(2), Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Ashu Garg, CA (virtual) Department represented by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 11.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 11.11.2025 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal, preferred by the assessee, is directed against the order dated 29.05.2024 (DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065213103(1), passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, arising out of the order dated 30.12.2021, passed by the NeAC, Delhi, under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Both the orders passed by the authorities below are found to be ex parte one. The assessee, therefore, sought for reconsideration of the issue involved in the matter afresh by the authorities below. In fact it further appears that though notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was served upon the assessee by the Learned Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 3023/D/2025 Assessing Officer, the assessee failed to appear and ultimately the order was passed making addition in the hands of the assessee under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. 3. Before the First Appellate Authority the assessee even failed to appear inspite of notice being served. However, in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice this Bench deems it fit and proper to grant further opportunity of being heard to the assessee and hence the appeal is disposed of by setting aside the orders of authorities below and remit the matter back to the file of the Learned AO with specific direction upon him to adjudicate the matter afresh upon granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence on record or any other evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. We also make it clear that in the event the assessee does not cooperate with the Ld. Assessing Officer, the said authority would be at liberty to proceed with the matter and finalize the same strictly in accordance with law. We order accordingly. 4. In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 11.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (M BALAGANESH) (Ms. MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 13.11.2025. *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 3023/D/2025 Printed from counselvise.com "