Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 01 ITAT CK 3261

Income Tax Officer vs Rachit Enterprises

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 30 January 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member · Manish Agarwal, Accountant Member
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
ITA No.5042/Del/2024

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

4 paragraphs · 226 words

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 30.09.2024 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068307976(1)arising out of the order dated 08.03.2023 u/s 147r.w.s144 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed Assessment Unit Income Tax Department for AY: 2018-19.

2.

At the time of hearing none appeared and record shows that notices have been issues repeatedly so no more opportunities justified.

3.

Ld. DR was heard who relied the ground as raised and however, what is material is that NFAC has quashed the notice u/s 148 of the Act issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer relying on various decisions of Hon’ble High Court and the only contention of the department is that as department has preferred Special Leave Petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India against the order of Hon’ble High Court relied by ld. CIT(A) the appeal has been preferred, however, it is not the case of the department that there was a stay of that decision relied by ld. First Appellate Authority or subsequently there is decision in favour of the department to be followed. Grounds as raised have no substance. The appeal is dismissed.