Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed two appeals against orders passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC for Assessment Years 2019-20 and 2020-21. The appeals arose from proceedings under Section 143(3) and Section 147 of the Income Tax Act.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged potential communication gaps in virtual hearings and a lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, the appeals were set aside and restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the lower appellate proceedings were conducted effectively, considering potential communication gaps and compliance with statutory requirements, warranting a restoration of the appeals.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Asstt. Year : 2019-20 : Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Sanjeev Agrawal, Vs Income Tax Officer, Plot No. D2/20, Sector-10, DLF, Ward-2(3), Faridabad-121006 Faridabad-121001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAZPA6949F Assessee by: Sh. Akul Agarwal, FCA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 19.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 19.08.2025 ORDER These assessee’s twin appeals & 2945/Del/2025, for Assessment Years 2019-20 and 2020-21, arise against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067800966(1) & 1067800797(1) dated 21.08.2024, in proceedings u/s 143(3) and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings and therefore, in the larger interest of justice met in case, the matter be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC.
& 2945/Del/2025 Sanjeev Agrawal 4. Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no effective compliance to section 250(6) of the Act in the impugned lower appellate order stipulating points of determination to be framed followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s instant appeals back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.