JBH INVESTMENT,SONEPAT vs. ITO, WARD - 1, SONEPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4829/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 January 2025AY 2014-15Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that communication gaps in the new faceless hearing system could not be ruled out. The assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes to be adjudicated afresh by the CIT(A)/NFAC.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2014-15 arose from an order disallowing a service tax expenditure claim of Rs. 38,71,712. The lower appellate proceedings were conducted ex-parte due to alleged communication gaps with the assessee's counsel.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte lower appellate proceedings, due to alleged communication gaps, were justifiable, and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

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

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068063333(1) dated 28.08.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges at the outset that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC proceedings ex-parte lower appellate discussion has affirmed the Assessing Officer’s action disallowing the assessee’s service tax expenditure claim of Rs.38,71,712/-, made in the course of assessment dated 23.03.2022.

JBH Investment 4. Learned counsel’s case accordingly is that it was on account of various communication gaps with the arguing counsel’s office that the assessee could not appear and explain it’s substantive grievance in the lower appellate proceedings. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the possibility of such communication gaps in the newly introduced system of faceless hearings could not be altogether ruled out. Be that as it may, the tribunal is of the considered view that the assessee’s instant appeal deserves to be 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. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 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 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →