TARU BATRA,GHAZIABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(5), GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5895/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that there was a lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the appeal was set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

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

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate order was procedurally flawed and whether the case should be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh adjudication due to non-compliance and communication gaps.

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: CA &
For Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR
Hearing: 25.06.2025Pronounced: 25.06.2025

Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Taru Batra, Vs Income Tax Officer, A/3, 2nd B-85, Nehru Nagar, Ward-5(3)(5), Ghazibad, U.P.-201001 Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida-201307 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AQZPB6663P Assessee by: Sh. Abhishek Jain, CA & Sh. Dilip Singh, CA Revenue by : Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 25.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.06.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067602214(1) dated 13.08.2024, 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 Assessing Officer.

Taru Batra 4. 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 Assessing Officer 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 →