MANOJ KUMAR BANGARU,GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5(1)(1), GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR, NOIDA, SECTOR-24, GAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted the possibility of communication gaps with virtual hearings and a lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the appeal was set aside and restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose against an order. The assessee's counsel submitted that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not present all facts in the lower appellate proceedings.
What were the issues?
Whether the lower appellate proceedings were conducted effectively, considering potential communication gaps and compliance with statutory requirements.
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
Asstt. Year : 2018-19 Manoj Kumar Bangaru, Vs DCIT, Tower-U, Flat No. 1506, Homes- Circle-5(1)(1), 121, Sector-121, Noida, Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh-201307 Noida-201301 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AJYPB3999E Assessee by: Sh. Balaji V, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 01.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 01.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A), Jodhpur’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1069886987(1) dated 23.10.2024, in proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
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.
Manoj Kumar Bangaru 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.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 01/07/2025.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026