KRITIKA JAIN L/H LATE SH. SANJAY JAIN,DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 61(1), DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES, E : NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 2928 & 2929/Del/2026 Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ms. Kritika Jain Vs ACIT L/H Late Sh. Sanjay Jain Circle – 61(1) 34, 1st Floor Khasra No.28 Civic Centre, Minto Road Near Tikona Park Kewal Park New Delhi-110 002 Azadpur, Delhi – 33 PAN: CBKPJ 5646 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Tanishq Ahuja, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Tarun Sharda, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 22.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 22.07.2026 ORDER PER RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the order dated 22.01.2026 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] arising out of the Assessment Order dated 30.03.2022 passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by ACIT/DCIT, NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AO’) pertaining to Assessment Years (A.Ys.) 2013-14 & 2014-15.

ITA Nos.2928 & 2929/Del/2026 Kritika Jain vs ACIT 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal in ITA No.2928/Del/2026 for A.Y. 2013-14 : 1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the NFAC is bad and liable to be quashed as the same was initiated by the Id. AO without having valid jurisdiction in terms of instruction no. 1/2011 [F. No. 187/12/2010-IT(A-1)], dt. 31.01.2011. 3. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, NFAC has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order without giving assessee an opportunity of being heard (ii) That the order has been passed without issuing any notice of hearing and relying on irrelevant facts. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the A.O. is bad in law having been initiated in violation of the statutory conditions of the Act and the procedure prescribed under the law and as such the same is bad in the eye of law and liable to be quashed. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the A.O. is bad in law having been initiated without proper approval as mandated under section 151 of the Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the NFAC has erred both on facts & in law in setting aside the order without giving finding on the merits of the case. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.”

ITA Nos.2928 & 2929/Del/2026 Kritika Jain vs ACIT 3. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, NFAC has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order without giving assessee an opportunity of being heard (ii) That the order has been passed without issuing any notice of hearing and relying on irrelevant facts. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the A.O. is bad in law having been initiated in violation of the statutory conditions of the Act and the procedure prescribed under the law and as such the same is bad in the eye of law and liable to be quashed. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the A.O. is bad in law having been initiated without proper approval as mandated under section 151 of the Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the NFAC has erred both on facts & in law in setting aside the order without giving finding on the merits of the case. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.”