GARDENCITY REALTY PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

During the hearing, the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”), at the outset, submitted that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee specifically requested an opportunity of personal hearing through video conferencing in order to make oral submissions. However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without granting a personal hearing through video conferencing. The learned AR further submitted that the learned CIT (A) did not properly consider the detailed submissions filed by the assessee and, without recording proper findings, dismissed the grounds raised by the assessee in both appeals. In support of her submissions, the learned AR placed on record the acknowledgement of submissions filed by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) in the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19, which contain a specific request for a personal hearing through video conferencing to make oral submissions.

On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative (“learned DR”), by vehemently relying upon the impugned orders, submitted that the learned CIT(A), after properly considering all the submissions of the assessee, decided the grounds raised by the assessee in its appeal.

We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. We find that the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021, formulated by the Central Government in the exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (6B) and sub-section (6C) of section 250 of the Act, provides that the Appellant or his authorised representative may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submission or present his case and the concerned Commissioner (Appeals) shall allow such request and communicate the date and time of hearing to the Appellant through the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The relevant clause of the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021, in this regard, reads as follows: - “12. No personal appearance in the Centres or Units.–– (1) A person shall not be required to appear either personally or through authorised representative in connection with any proceedings under this Scheme before the income-tax authority at the National Faceless Appeal Centre or appeal unit set up under this Scheme. (2) The appellant or his authorised representative, as the case may be, may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submissions or present his case before the Commissioner (Appeals), through the National Faceless Appeal Centre, under this Scheme. (3) The concerned Commissioner (Appeals) shall allow the request for personal hearing and communicate the date and time of hearing to the appellant through the National Faceless Appeal Centre. (4) Such hearing shall be conducted through video conferencing or video telephony, including use of any telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony, to the extent technologically feasible, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Board. (5) Any examination or recording of the statement of the appellant or any other person shall be conducted by Commissioner (Appeals) under this Scheme, exclusively through video conferencing or video telephony, including use of any telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony, to the extent technologically feasible, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Board. (6) The Board shall establish suitable facilities for video conferencing or video telephony including telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony at such locations as may be necessary, so as to ensure that the appellant, or his authorised representative, or any other person is not denied the benefit of this Scheme merely on the ground that such appellant or his authorised representative, or any other person does not have access to video conferencing or video telephony at his end.”

It is evident from the record that the assessee, though made the request to the learned CIT(A) for grant of opportunity for personal hearing through the National Faceless Appeal Centre, the same was not granted to the assessee. Therefore, in view of the above, we deem it appropriate to restore Page 3 of 5 the appeals to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after granting the opportunity to the assessee for personal hearing as per the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021. The assessee can make a fresh request in this regard as per the aforesaid clause (12) of the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021. With the above directions, the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT(A) are set aside. As the matters are being restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for consideration afresh, the other grievances raised by the assessee in the present appeals do not call for adjudication at this stage. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 9th July, 2026

CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore

CIT(A)