Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessee submitted that due to communication gaps at various levels, they could not appear and prove facts in the lower appellate proceedings. The tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps in virtual hearings and lack of compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal held that in the larger interest of justice, the matter should be set aside and restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication. The assessee would be given three effective opportunities of hearing at their own risk and responsibility.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the lower appellate authority and if the matter should be restored for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
147, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082007575(1) dated 27.10.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
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 restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC.
Anshu Kumari 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. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no effective compliance to section 250(6) of the Act in the impugned lower appellate order stipulating points of determination to be framed followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.