Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2019-20 arose from an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC, which was decided ex-parte. The assessee did not appear, and the revenue argued for dismissal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte and acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps due to the new faceless hearing system. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in proceeding ex-parte without ensuring proper communication and whether the appeal should be restored for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
147, 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. S. Rifaur Rahman
Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Veecon Media & Broadcasting Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, 60-A, Sainik Farms C-5, Lane, Centra, Circle-25(1), Khanpur, New Delhi-110062 New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AADCV0152C Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Ramesh Chand, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 13.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 13.05.2025 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2019-20, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024–25/1066874575(1) dated 22.07.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”)
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding Veecon Media & Broadcasting Pvt. Ltd. disallowances/additions herein. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the CIT(A)/NFAC to first frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.
Mr. Ramesh Chand vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.
Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.