Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals against the orders of the PCIT(A) for assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, and 2019-20, which arose from proceedings under Section 153C of the Income-tax Act. The assessee's counsel argued that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not adequately present their case before the lower appellate authority.
Held
The Tribunal noted the possibility of communication gaps and, in the larger interest of justice, restored the appeals back to the PCIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The PCIT(A) was directed to provide three effective opportunities for hearing to the appellant.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals should be restored to the PCIT(A) due to alleged communication gaps preventing proper presentation of the case by the assessee.
Sections Cited
153C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘E’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
Date of hearing 26.12.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.12.2025 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s three appeals to 7442/Del/2025 for assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2019- 20, arise against the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-25 [in short, the “PCIT(A)”], New Delhi’s orders, all dated 10.11.2025, having DINs and orders no. ITBA/APL/M/250/2025- 26/1082420519(1), ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1082420703(1) and ITBA/APL/M/250/2025-26/1082420956(1), involving proceedings under section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings; and, therefore, larger interest of justice would be met, in case, the matters may be restored back to the PCIT(A). The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. It is, therefore, deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant three appeals back to the PCIT(A) for its afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.