VIVEK KUMAR DHAND,RAIPUR, CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 08, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 960/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps, especially with virtual hearings, and found merit in the assessee's submission.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel submitted that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not present facts effectively in lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be set aside to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication due to communication gaps hindering the assessee's representation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Paritosh Jain, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Amisha S. Gupt., CIT-DR
Hearing: 13.05.2025Pronounced: 13.05.2025

PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM : These appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the respective Orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-25, Delhi relating to the captioned assessment years.

2.

Heard both the parties at length and perused the records.

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 2 restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. Ld. DR did not have any objection to this proposition.

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. Ld. Counsel’s further submission is that there was some communication gap between the assessee who was residing at Raipur and the CA Consultant who was based at Delhi. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s present appeals back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ordered accordingly.

5.

In the result, all the 04 assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 13/05/2025. (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SRBHATNAGAR

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →