BHARAT KUMAR VARMA,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD-5(1)(2), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3268/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps due to the virtual hearing mechanism and the lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, the appeal was set aside to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 arises against an order in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee submitted that due to communication gaps at various levels, they could not appear effectively in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC due to communication gaps and lack of proper adjudication in the lower appellate proceedings? Whether Section 115BBE applies to transactions before 01.04.2017?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250(6),Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 23.07.2025Pronounced: 23.07.2025

Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Bharat Kumar Varma, Vs Income Tax Officer, H. No. 13, Wajidpur, Sector-63, Ward-5(1)(2), Gautam Budh Nagar, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida-201307 Noida-201307 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ASVPV3051H Assessee by: Sh. Abhishek Jain, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Mumbai’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1074689020(1) dated 19.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

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.

Bharat Kumar Varma 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 appeal 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.

5.

So far as assessee’s assessment under Section 115BBE is concerned, we quote S.M.I.L.E Microfinance Limited Vs. The ACIT CC-1 in W.P.(MD) No.2078 of 2020 & W.M.P. (MD) No. 1742 of 2020 held that the said provision applied for transactions done on or after 01.04.2017 only. The assessee is accordingly directed to be assessed under normal provisions only.

More judgments on Section 115BBE

All 8,662 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115BBE →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →