MANGALAYA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-16(2), DELHI

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 16.04.2024 pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16.

The solitary substantive grievance in this appeal filed by the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has violated the principles of natural justice by passing requested for virtual hearing due to technicality of the assessee.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that the ld. CIT(A) has denied the assessee’s request for virtual hearing and failed to pass a speaking order. It is the say of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(A) has upheld the additions made by the Assessing Officer without even considering and discussing the submissions filed by the assessee alongwith remand report issued by the Assessing Officer and rejoinder filed by the assessee alongwith relevant documents.

Per contra, the ld DR relied on the orders of lower authorities.

We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that the assessee had requested for a virtual hearing before the CIT(A) which was not provided nor given any reason for the rejection of such request. We are therefore, of the considered view that in the interest of justice and fair play, the appeal be set aside to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the issues in the appeal afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and adhering to the principle of natural justice. The assessee is directed to furnish all necessary documents/evidence as and when required by the ld. CIT(A). Page 2 of 4 [A.Y. 2015-16] Managalaya Buildtech Vs. ITO 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 10.12.2025.