PRAGYA THAREJA,NOIDA vs. ITO WARD 2(4), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3424/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 November 2024AY 2014-15Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed (for statistical purpose)

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to frame points of determination and provide a detailed adjudication on the merits as required by Section 250(6). The assessee was made responsible for pleading and proving all relevant facts during these fresh proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2014-15, which originated from proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) had summarily rejected the appeal without discussing the merits of the case or adhering to the procedural requirements stipulated under Section 250(6) of the Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in rejecting the assessee's appeal without discussing merits and failing to comply with the procedural mandate of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 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

Hearing: 11.11.2024Pronounced: 21.11.2024

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, arises against the order of CIT(A), Noida dated 30.03.2017 in Appeal No. 164/E-filing/2016-17/Noida, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”).

2.

Heard both parties at length. Case files perused.

3.

Coming straightaway to the CIT(A) impugned lower appellate order under challenge. It is emerges at the outset that he has simply rejected the assessee’s appeal in a single para without having discussion anything at all on merits much less than that contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring him to frame points of determination followed by a detailed adjudication there upon.

4.

Faced with this situation, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for afresh effective innings with a rider that it shall be the

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose in above terms. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 21/11/2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →