RANDHIR KUMAR CHOUDHARY,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 36(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3273/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 July 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps and the lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the appeal and restored it to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 against an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The appeal arises from proceedings under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's counsel submitted that due to communication gaps and the new virtual hearing mechanism, the assessee could not adequately present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate authority provided adequate opportunities for hearing and adjudication, considering the challenges of virtual hearings and communication gaps.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 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

Hearing: 23.07.2025Pronounced: 23.07.2025

Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Randhir Kumar Choudhary, Vs Income Tax Officer, C-2, Bhagat Singh Park Village, Ward-36(1), Siraspur, New Delhi-110042 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AEBPC7626P Assessee by: Sh. Nitin Gulathi, Adv. 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 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1074750494(1) dated 20.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 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.

Randhir Kumar Choudhary 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.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →