SATILILA SEHKARI AWAS SAMITI LIMITED,NOIDA vs. WARD 5(2)(3), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8200/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 January 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps. Considering the larger interest of justice, it was deemed appropriate to restore the appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2017-18 arises against an order involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee's counsel argued that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not effectively plead and prove relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC due to communication gaps hindering the assessee's ability to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

Hearing: 19.01.2026Pronounced: 19.01.2026

Date of hearing 19.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 19.01.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081558961(1), dated 08.10.2025 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 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, larger interest of justice would be met, in case, the matter may be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making 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 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)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →