KARUNESH BHALLA,GURGAON, HARYANA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1), GURGAON
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps with the new virtual hearing mechanism. It deemed it appropriate in the interest of justice to restore the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-21 was against an order passed under section 154 of the Income-tax Act. The assessee claimed that due to communication gaps, they could not present all relevant facts before the lower appellate authority.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was prevented from presenting their case effectively before the lower appellate authority due to communication gaps, warranting a remand.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A), Mysore’s order dated 08.12.2025, having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1083397468(1), involving proceedings under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
ITA No.1201/Del/2026
Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
2 | P a g e
ITA No.1201/Del/2026
Order pronounced in the open court on 13th May, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 14th May, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi
3 | P a g e
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026