KULDEEP CHAUHAN,GHAZIABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(3), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2802/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 July 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps, especially with the new virtual hearing mechanism. It also noted potential non-compliance with section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 arose from an order passed under sections 147 read with 144 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee contended that due to communication gaps and issues with virtual hearings, they could not effectively present their case before the lower appellate authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented from presenting their case effectively due to communication gaps, and if the lower appellate order complied with procedural requirements.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,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

For Appellant: Ms. Bandana Kothari, Adv
Hearing: 21.07.2025Pronounced: 21.07.2025

Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Kuldeep Chauhan, Vs Income Tax Officer, 54, Vill-Karhera, Ghaziabad, Ward-1(3), Uttar Pradesh-201001 Ghaziabad-201002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ALQPC6952Q Assessee by: Ms. Bandana Kothari, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 21.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1073766327(1) dated 27.02.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.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.

Kuldeep Chauhan 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 →