JYOTI ANTHONY ,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX WARD 54(3), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 110/DEL/2024Status: HeardITAT Delhi06 January 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had proceeded ex-parte against the assessees and lacked substantive adjudication. Acknowledging potential communication gaps due to the new faceless/hybrid hearing system, the Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

A batch of eight appeals was filed by two assessees, Shri Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Om Sai Infravision Pvt. Ltd., against the DCIT for assessment years 2014-15 to 2018-19. The appeals concern penalties levied by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeals when proceedings were ex-parte and without detailed discussion? Whether the appeals should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication considering potential procedural gaps?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

Hearing: 13.05.2025Pronounced: 13.05.2025

ORDER Per Bench: The instant batch of eight appeals involves twin assessees herein, namely, Shri Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Om Sai Infravision Pvt. Ltd. All other relevant details thereof stand tabulated as under: to 113/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. to 117/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai Infravision Pvt. Ltd. Sl. A.Y. ITA Nos. Appellant Respondent Order passed Proceeding No. against s u/s 1. 2014-15 110/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271(1)(c) Infrapromoters DIN & order No. Pvt. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070216020(1) Dated 08.11.2024 2. 2015-16 111/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271(1)(c) Infrapromoters DIN & order No. Pvt. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070216357(1) Dated 08.11.2024 3. 2017-18 112/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271AAC1 Infrapromoters DIN & order No. Pvt. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070216111(1) Dated 08.11.2024 4. 2018-19 113/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271AAC1 Infrapromoters DIN & order No. Pvt. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070216527(1) Dated 08.11.2024 5. 2014-15 114/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271(1)(c) Infravision Pvt. DIN & order No. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070215145(1) Dated 08.11.2024 6. 2015-16 115/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271(1)(c) Infravision Pvt. DIN & order No. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070215401(1) Dated 08.11.2024 7. 2017-18 116/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271AAC1 Infravision Pvt. DIN & order No. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070215637(1) Dated 08.11.2024 8. 2018-19 117/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai DCIT CIT(A), Delhi-23, 271AAC1 Infravision Pvt. DIN & order No. Ltd. ITBA/APL/S/250/ 2024-25 / 1070215737(1) Dated 08.11.2024

2.

Cases called twice. None appears at the assessees behest.

They are accordingly proceeded ex-parte. to 113/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. to 117/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai Infravision Pvt. Ltd.

3.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)’s identical detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessees thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action levying the corresponding penalty(ies) herein. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the learned CIT(A) to first frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.

4.

Mr. Chand vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessees had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, their instant appeals deserve to be dismissed.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessees, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer(s) and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless/hybrid hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.

6.

Faced with this situation and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessees all instant appeals back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate to 113/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai Infrapromoters Pvt. Ltd. to 117/Del/2025 Shri Om Sai Infravision Pvt. Ltd. adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayers shall plead and prove the case at their own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →