DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MODERATE CREDIT CORPORATION PVT. LTD., WEST BENGAL

PDF · subscribers

ITA 6222/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 March 2025AY 2008-09Bench: SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SH. AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the possibility of communication gaps at various levels, particularly with the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism, could not be ruled out. In the larger interest of justice, it was deemed appropriate to restore the assessee's appeal back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The Assessing Officer was directed to provide three effective opportunities of hearing to the appellant. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal did not decide the merits of the additions made by the lower authorities.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Global India Electricals, has filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. This order was passed under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that due to communication gaps at various levels, they were unable to present and prove all relevant facts during the lower appellate proceedings. The Revenue supported the action of the lower authority in making additions on merits. The Tribunal noted the possibility of communication gaps in the virtual hearing mechanism.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the matter should be restored back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication due to alleged communication gaps during lower appellate proceedings, preventing the assessee from presenting all relevant facts? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the Act). Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that communication gaps prevented them from effectively pleading and proving their case before the CIT(A)/NFAC and therefore, the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer. No specific authorities or precedents were cited. Revenue's contention: The Revenue vehemently supported the action of the lower authority and argued for additions made on merits. No specific authorities or precedents were cited.

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

For Appellant: Ms. Meenal Goyal, CA

Hearing: 24.11.2025Pronounced: 24.11.2025

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/250/2025-26/1080587527(1), dated 10.09.2025 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

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 Assessing Officer. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the addition(s) herein on merits.

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 Assessing Officer 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 →