SHASHI KIRAN SAIGAL,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-28(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4812/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 January 2025AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored both the quantum and penalty appeals to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee three effective opportunities to present her case. Both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a senior citizen, filed twin appeals against a common order by CIT(A)/NFAC for AY 2012-13, which proceeded ex-parte against her. The appeals challenged additions of Rs. 34 lakhs under Section 69A and TDS receipts, as well as a consequential penalty under Section 271(1)(c), citing communication gaps in the faceless assessment.

What were the issues?

The key issues were the validity of ex-parte proceedings by the CIT(A) despite communication gaps faced by a senior citizen assessee in the faceless regime, and the correctness of additions under Section 69A and consequential penalty under Section 271(1)(c).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 271(1)(c),Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 07.01.2025Pronounced: 07.01.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 4812/Del/2024
ITA No. 4813/Del/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

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.

2.

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.

4.

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.

5.

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.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →