AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Mahavir Singh, Vice President :
This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of learned CIT(A)-29, New Delhi in appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-29 10902/2016-17 dated 27th February, 2026. Assessment was framed by the ACIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18 under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') vide order dated 30th March, 2025.
At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to ground No.8 of the appeal and argued that the appellate order passed by the learned CIT(A) is ex-parte and without providing adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in violation of principles of natural justice. The relevant ground No.8 reads as under:-
“8.That the order dated 27.02.2026 passed u/s 250 of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi is against law and facts on the file in as much as he was not justified in passing the appellate order ex parte without providing adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Appellant thereby violating the principles of natural justice.”
Learned Counsel for the assessee took us through the order of learned CIT(A) and shown us paragraph No.4 wherein there are three notices issued on 20th August, 2025 for compliance on 26th August, 2025, of 5th January, 2026 for compliance on 7th January, 2026 and of 10th February, 2026 for compliance on 13th February, 2026. Learned Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the notice is less than seven days in each of the hearings and assessee sought for adjournment as noted by the learned CIT(A) in paragraph No.4. Learned Counsel pointed out that learned CIT(A) has applied the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri B.N. Bhattacharjee and another – 118 ITR 461 (SC) and stated that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and thereafter, he also decided on merits by a non-speaking order.
When this was pointed out to the learned CIT-DR, he could not controvert the above fact situation and could not support the order of learned CIT(A), rather, he agreed for remanding the matter back to the file of the learned CIT(A).
We have considered the submissions of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. We noted that the learned CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Even the time period allowed to the assessee for compliance of the notices of hearing issued was not sufficient, which resulted in passing of a non-speaking order on merits. Considering all the facts, we are of the considered opinion that it would meets the ends of justice if the assessee is provided reasonable opportunity of being heard in accordance with law. The matter is, therefore, remanded to the file of the learned CIT(A) for providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee and thereafter, pass a speaking order in accordance with law. The other grounds raised by the assessee are kept open. Learned CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate all the grounds raised before the Tribunal.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.