Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 08 ITAT CK 6663

Anil Sharma vs Ito, Hapur Chungi, Ghaziabad

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 20 August 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ramit Kochar, Accountant Member · Sudhir Pareek, Judicial Member
CASE NUMBER
ITA No. 286/Del/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 226 words

PER SUDHIR PAREEK, JM

The instant appeal is emanating from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, (NFAC), Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2019-20/10439219 dated 13.11.2025 relevant to assessment year 2020-21.

2.

Heard rival submissions and carefully scanned the material available on record.

3.

At the threshold, reiterating the grounds of appeal, the Learned AR submitted that the first appellate authority dismissed the appeal without providing real opportunity to place evidences and facts already on record have not been considered and by submitting above, prayed for setting aside the impugned order and remitting back for fresh adjudication. It is noted that in this case the Learned AO has passed the order u/s. 144 of the Act, and Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the appellant on account of non-prosecution and even without deciding the matter on merits of the case. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix and in the interest of justice, we remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the Learned CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. We hold and direct accordingly. Simultaneously, appellant is also directed to fully cooperate with the proceedings and furnish the requisite evidences/documents before it to substantiate its case.

4.

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above.