Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2026) 03 ITAT CK 2937

Gurpinder Singh vs Income Tax Officer

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'SMC', New Delhi · Decided on 17 March 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member
CASE NUMBER
ITA No. 596/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

9 paragraphs · 330 words

ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 arises against the C IT(A)/NFAC, De lhi’ s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1066370305(1) dated 03.07.2024, in proceed ings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1 961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the asse ssee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

Delay of 477 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisitio n vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) .

4.

It e merges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding disallowances/additions here in. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the CIT(A)/NFAC to fir st frame points of determinatio n followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.

5.

Mr. Manoj Kumar vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

6.

I have given my thoughtful co nsideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A)/NFAC has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, an NRI, possibility of some communicatio n gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.

7.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the asse ssee’s instant appeal back to the Assessing Officer for it’s afresh appropriate adjudicatio n, within three effe ctive opportunitie s subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in conseque ntial proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

8.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.