MOHD HAYYAT,VILLAGE NALHEDA GAZI vs. COMMISSIONER, CIT APPEALS

ITA 1881/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 June 2025AY 2012-133 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and set aside the appeal. The matter was restored back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, providing three effective opportunities for hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a significant delay of 420 days. The assessee's counsel argued that communication gaps prevented them from presenting all relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal should be heard on merits despite a significant delay and alleged communication gaps in the lower proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
3,926 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: CA |

For Respondent: DR |

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: "SMC" NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.1881/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Assessee by | Sh. Niraj Mangla, CA Department by | Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR

Date of hearing | 05.06.2025 Date of pronouncement | 05.06.2025

ORDER

This assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the "CIT(A)/NFAC"], Delhi's DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057046489 (1), dated 13.10.2023, involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

- 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused. - 3. The delay of 420 days in filing the assessee's instant appeal is condoned in light of larger interest of justice as well as Collector,

Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

- 4. 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 support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits. - 5. Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. 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. - 6. This assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 5th June, 2025

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 5th June, 2025.

RK/-

Copy forwarded to:

- 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT - 4. CIT(A) - 5. DR

Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →