VISHAL JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT, CC-26, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3409/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 July 2025AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps and, in the interest of justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted three effective opportunities to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2021-22 was filed against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee contended that due to communication gaps, they could not present all relevant facts before the lower appellate authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented from adequately presenting their case before the CIT(A) due to communication gaps, and if so, whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Monark Jain, Adv
Hearing: 24.07.2025Pronounced: 24.07.2025

Date of hearing 24.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2021-22, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s order dated 25.03.2025 passed in case no. CIT(A), Delhi-29 10080/2020-21, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

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, the matter may be restored back to the CIT(A). The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits.

3.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. It is, therefore, deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →