UMAR HAYAT,SAHARSA V. ITO WARD 3(4), SAHARSA

ITA 254/PAT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Umar Hayat against an ex-parte order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The primary contention was the ex-parte decision made by the CIT (A), which did not address the issues on merit. Both the assessee's counsel and the Departmental Representative agreed that the case should be reconsidered on its merits. The Tribunal found procedural improprieties in the handling of the appeal by the CIT (A) and thus restored the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788953 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Section 250(6) of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHWANI KR. SINGAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No.254/PAT/2025 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Umar Hayat Meer tola Saharsa, Saharsa- 852201, Bihar Vs. ITO Ward 3(4) Income Tax Office, Kings st, Rajwanshi Nagar, Saharsa- 852201, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AHFPH6068R Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR Date of hearing: 28.11.2025 Date of pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 08.04.2025 for the AY 2014-15. 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order was passed ex-parte by the learned CIT (A). The ld. Counsel for the assessee therefore prayed that the issue may kindly be restored to the file of the ld. CIT (A), so that issue could be decided on merit afresh. 2.1. The ld. DR on the other hand did not oppose the counsel of the assessee. 2.2. We after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that apparently this appeal was Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA No.254/PAT/2025 Umar Hayat; A.Y. 2014-15 decided ex-parte by the learned CIT (A). We note that despite numerous notices, none presented before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) passed an ex-parte order in limine without deciding the issues at merit, which in our opinion is in violation of Provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, this appeal is restored to the file of the learned CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It is further clarified that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise required for valid and reasonable cause. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (VICE PRESIDENT) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Patna, Dated: 28.11.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com "