M/s Carnation Projects (P) Ltd. vs ACIT, CC-28, New Delhi

PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JM :

These 04 appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the respective impugned orders, all dated 25.8.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-25), New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2014-15 to 2017-18 respectively. In all these appeals common question of issues and facts are involved, hence, for the sake of convenience and brevity, these appeals are being decided by this common order, by dealing with ITA No. 2421/Del/2026 (AY 2014-15), wherein, Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal in default of the assessee.

This appeal has been preferred on the grounds, in addition to others that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing exparte impugned order without observing the principles of natural justice.

Ld. CIT(DR) supported the orders of the authorities below.

Perused the records and heard Ld. Representative for the Appellant-Assessee and Ld. CIT(DR) for the Respondent-Revenue. We notice that assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, therefore, Ld. CIT(A) passed exparte impugned order by dismissing the appeal in default of assessee on merits. The reluctant attitude of the assessee cannot be appreciated. However, in the interest of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit and proper to afford last opportunity to the assessee and thus remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the Ld. CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal of the appeal. Also, assessee should refrain from seeking any adjournment except for compelling and unavoidable circumstances. Needless to say that the Ld. CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. It is made clear that we have not made any observation in respect of the merits of the case. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.

The facts of these appeals are identical to the facts of ITA No. 2421/Del/2026 (AY 2014-15). Hence, our findings given in ITA NO. 2421/Del/2026 (AY 2014-15) will mutatis mutandis apply to these appeals also. Accordingly, these appeals of the Assesse are also liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, all the Assessee’s appeals ITA No. 2421, 2422, 2423 & 2424/Del/2026 stand allowed for statistical purposes.