Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's twin appeals for AY 2016-17 and 2017-18 arose against the CIT(A)'s order. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not appear and present relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal noted the possibility of communication gaps and also a lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matters were set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication due to communication gaps and procedural irregularities.
Sections Cited
153C, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara&
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
These assessee’s twin appeals & 893/Del/2025 for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18, arise against the CIT(A)-29, New Delhi’s order dated 23.12.2024 in case Nos. CIT(A), Delhi-29/11055/2015-16 and CIT(A), Delhi- 29/10683/2016-17, in proceedings u/s 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead
Kamal Taneja 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).
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. 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 both the appeals 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.