NARESH KUMAR SHARMA,HARYANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 27, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeals back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee three opportunities of hearing. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
What were the facts?
A batch of seven appeals was filed by the assessee, Naresh Kumar Sharma, against the DCIT. The appeals pertain to various assessment years from 2012-13 to 2020-21.
What were the issues?
Whether the lower appellate order was passed without effective compliance to Section 250(6) of the Act and if communication gaps prejudiced the assessee's case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Heard together (7 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
ORDER The instant batch of seven appeals pertains to single assessees herein namely, Sh. Naresh Kumar Sharma. All other relevant details thereof stand tabulated as under:
Sl. N o. A.Y . ITA N os . Ap pe ll an t Re sp on den t O rde r pa ss e d ag ains t Pro ce e di ngs u / s 1- 7 2 01 2- 1 3 t o 32 1 7 to N a res h DCIT C IT( A) - 2 9, N ew D elhi 153 C r.w.s . 2 01 4- 1 5 , 32 2 1/ Del /2 02 5 Ku mar In D IN & orde r N o. 143 ( 3) 2 01 6- 1 7 , 32 2 3 & Sh arm a ITB A/APL/ S/ 9 1 /2 0 24 - 2 01 7- 1 8 , 32 2 4/ Del /2 02 5 2 5/ 1 0 74 42 657 3 (1) , 2 01 9- 2 0 & 1 07 4 4 276 34(1) , 2 02 0- 2 1 1 07 4 4 285 61(1) , 1 07 4 4 292 40(1) , 1 07 4 4 310 71(1) , 1 07 4 4 299 95(1) & 1 07 4 4 304 10(1) Date d 12 .0 3.2 0 25
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 to 3221, 3223 & 3224/Del/2025 Naresh Kumar Sharma 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).
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. 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) 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 →- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
