ANIL KUMAR GUPTA,GANDHI NAGAR vs. WARD 58(1), DELHI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2437/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 July 2025AY 2011-2012Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps, especially with the virtual hearing mechanism. To ensure justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12 arose against an order involving proceedings under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee's counsel argued that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not present all facts in lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC due to communication gaps preventing proper presentation of facts by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 08.07.2025Pronounced: 08.07.2025

Date of hearing 08.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 08.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT (A)- 1, Hyderabad’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1071446853(1), dated 23.12.2024, involving proceedings under section 144 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)/NFAC. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the 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 of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism 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)/NFAC 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 →