ALOK GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-28(4), DELHI, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1231/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Naveen Chandra (Accountant 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 acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps, especially with virtual hearings, and the lack of compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. 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 2012-13 arose against an order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee claimed that due to communication gaps, they could not present all facts in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate proceedings were conducted properly, considering alleged communication gaps and non-compliance with statutory requirements, warranting a remand for fresh adjudication.

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 ‘A’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Naveen Chandra

Hearing: 22.05.2025Pronounced: 29.05.2025

Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Alok Gupta, Vs Income Tax Officer, F-6, 2nd Floor, Maharani Bagh, Ward-28(4), New Delhi-110065 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAEPG8895R Assessee by : Sh. Anil Sethi, CA Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 22.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 29.05.2025 ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1048127119(1) dated 21.12.2022, 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

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 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 →