SANJAY SINGH,ATRAULI vs. ITO WARD 2(3)(4), HAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5294/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 July 2026AY 2012-20133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal restored the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. This was done due to potential communication gaps in the virtual hearing mechanism and in the larger interest of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act. There was a significant delay in filing the appeal, which was condoned by the tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the lower appellate authority due to communication gaps in virtual proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Kalash Jiwtani, CA
For Respondent: Shri Nirmal Nangia, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09.07.2026Pronounced: 09.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.-5294/Del/2026 Assessment Year: - 2012-13 Sanjay Singh, Vs. ITO, Ranjit Singh Vill Atrauli, Post Ward 2(3)(4), Atrauli, Ghaziabad. Adarsh Nagar Colony, Madhuban Colony, Meerut, Hapur Road. PAN: IWAPS3540B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Kalash Jiwtani, CA Department by Shri Nirmal Nangia, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 09.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 09.07.2026 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 “Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s order dated 25.09.2024 having DIN & Order No.- ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1069087841(1), involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

ITA No.- 5294/Del/2026 Sanjay Singh 2. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

3.

Delay of 527 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (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). The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the 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 of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

ITA No.- 5294/Del/2026 Sanjay Singh 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09th July, 2026

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 21st July, 2026. Pooja. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →