Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's twin appeals were against a common order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC for Assessment Year 2012-13, in proceedings under Section 147 and Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The appeals related to additions made to income, including cash deposits and TDS receipts.
Held
The Tribunal restored the appeals back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee three opportunities to plead and prove her case. This was due to communication gaps experienced by the senior citizen assessee in the faceless regime.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee, being a senior citizen, was prejudiced by communication gaps in the faceless regime, warranting a restoration of the appeal for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 271(1)(c), 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Asstt. Year: 2012-13 : Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Shashi Kiran Saigal, Vs Income Tax Officer, 5, 1st Floor, Navjeevan Vihar, Ward-28(1), New Delhi-110017 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AQKPS0557J Assessee by : Sh. Santosh Kumar Mishra, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 07.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 07.01.2025 ORDER These assessee’s twin appeals in CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067814061(1) and her latter appeal directed against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1067815693(1)’s common order dated 21.08.2024, for Assessment Year 2012-13, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 and u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
& 4813/Del/2024 Shashi Kiran Saigal challenging correctness of the learned lower authority’s action adding her cash deposits of Rs.34,00,000/- u/s 69A of the Act and TDS receipts of Rs.81,974/-; respectively, it emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the CIT(A)/NFAC herein had proceeded ex-parte against her whilst confirming Assessing Officer’s action to this effect.
Learned counsel submits in this factual backdrop that the assessee is a senior citizen and because of various communication gaps with the arguing counsel, she could not plead and prove her case in the lower appellate proceedings. The Revenue could hardly dispute that possibility of such communication gaps in the newly introduced system of faceless regime couldn’t 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 it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. This quantum appeal is accepted for statistical purposes.
Same order to follow in assessee’s consequential penalty appeal ITA No. 4813/Del/2024.
& 4813/Del/2024 Shashi Kiran Saigal 6. Both these assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above term. A copy of the common order be placed in the respective case files. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 07/01/2025.