Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, World Bank Unit-1, filed a batch of forty-nine appeals concerning assessment years 2016-17 to 2022-23. The assessee contended that due to communication gaps, potentially arising from the virtual hearing mechanism, they were unable to present all relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps in virtual hearings and, in the interest of justice, decided to set aside the appeals. The matters were restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the case should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication due to communication gaps during virtual hearings.
Sections Cited
Section 200A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal
Sl. N o. IT A N os . A. Y . Ap pella nt Re s pon den t O rde r pa s se d a gains t P roce e dings u/ s 1. 454 , 45 5 , 456 , 201 6- 17 W orl d Ban k ITO CIT( A) / N FA C, De lhi’s 20 0A 457 , 47 7 , 478 , U nit- 1 DIN & orde r No . 479 & 4 80 / Ag r. ITB A/ N F A C/ S/ 25 0/ 2 0 24 - / 202 4 25/ 1 0 67 4 1 449 1( 1) , 106 7 4 41 7 94( 1 ) , 106 7 4 42 2 08( 1 ) , 106 7 4 42 8 57( 1 ) , 106 7 4 41 1 06( 1 ) , 106 7 4 14 7 45( 1 ) , 106 7 4 49 2 08( 1 ) date d 07. 0 8 .2 0 24 , 0 8. 08 .2 024 2. 458 , 45 9 , 460 , 201 7- 18 W orl d Ban k ITO CIT( A) / N FA C, De lhi’s 20 0A 481 , 48 2, 4 8 3 & U nit- 1 DIN & orde r No . 484 / A gr./ 20 24 ITB A/ N F A C/ S/ 25 0/ 2 0 24 - 25/ 1 0 67 4 6 049 4( 1) , 106 7 4 61 0 38( 1 ) , 106 7 4 64 8 28( 1 ) , 106 7 4 58 2 70( 1 ) , 106 7 4 58 9 63( 1 ) , 106 7 4 59 9 60( 1 ) , 106 7 4 59 4 23( 1 ) date d 08. 0 8 .2 024 to 502/Agr./2024 2 World Bank Unit-1
3. 461 , 46 2 , 463 , 201 8- 19 W orl d Ban k ITO CIT( A) / N FA C, De lhi’s 20 0A 485 , 48 6, 4 8 7 & U nit- 1 DIN & orde r No . 488 / A gr./ 20 24 ITB A/ N F A C/ S/ 25 0/ 2 0 24 - 25/ 1 0 67 5 0 369 2( 1) , 106 7 4 92 9 94( 1 ) , 106 7 5 04 5 15( 1 ) , 106 7 4 91 7 09( 1 ) , 106 7 4 92 4 35( 1 ) , 106 7 4 92 7 98( 1 ) , 106 7 5 02 9 06( 1 ) date d 09. 0 8 .2 024 4. 464 , 46 5 , 466 , 201 9- 20 W orl d Ban k ITO CIT( A) / N FA C, De lhi’s 20 0A 489 , 49 0, 4 9 1 & U nit- 1 DIN & orde r No . 492 / A gr./ 20 24 ITB A/ N F A C/ S/ 25 0/ 2 0 24 - 25/ 1 0 67 9 2 007 8( 1) , 106 7 9 18 2 82( 1 ) , 106 7 9 20 4 64( 1 ) , 106 7 9 17 7 32( 1 ) , 106 7 9 18 9 26( 1 ) , 106 7 9 20 8 23( 1 ) , 106 7 9 19 4 24( 1 ) date d 23. 0 8 .2 024 5. 467 , 46 8 , 469 , 202 0- 21 W orl d Ban k ITO CIT( A) / N FA C, De lhi’s 20 0A 470 , 49 3 , 494 , U nit- 1 DIN & orde r No . 495 & 4 9 6/ ITB A/ N F A C/ S/ 25 0/ 2 0 24 - Agr. /2 0 24 25/ 1 0 67 9 2 366 1( 1) , 106 7 9 22 6 41( 1 ) , 106 7 9 24 7 82( 1 ) , 106 7 9 23 4 15( 1 ) , 106 7 9 24 2 08( 1 ) , 106 7 9 22 7 9( 1) , 106 7 9 24 4 70( 1 ) , 106 8 0 22 6 90( 1 ) date d 23. 0 8 .2 024 , 2 7. 08 .2 024 6. 471 , 47 2 , 473 , 202 1- 22 W orl d Ban k ITO CIT( A) / N FA C, De lhi’s 20 0A 470 , 49 7 , 498 , U nit- 1 DIN & orde r No . 499 & ITB A/ N F A C/ S/ 25 0/ 2 0 24 - 500 / A gr./ 20 24 25/ 1 0 67 9 2 997 6( 1) , 106 7 9 29 3 66( 1 ) , 106 7 9 27 8 59( 1 ) , 106 7 9 28 8 45( 1 ) , 106 7 9 29 6 41( 1 ) , 106 7 9 27 2 87( 1 ) , 106 7 9 28 2 78( 1 ) dat e d 2 3. 0 8 .2 0 24 7. 474 , 47 5, 5 0 1 & 202 2- 23 W orl d Ban k ITO CIT( A) / N FA C, De lhi’s 20 0A 502 / A gr. /2 0 24 U nit- 1 DIN & orde r No . ITB A/ N F A C/ S/ 25 0/ 2 0 24 - 25/ 1 0 67 9 3 122 5( 1) , 106 79 30 7 28( 1 ) , 106 7 9 31 5 25( 1 ) , 106 7 9 31 0 06( 1 ) dat e d 2 3. 0 8 .2 0 24
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
The assessee identically avers in all these case files that on account of communication gaps at various levels, it could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings; and therefore, in the larger to 502/Agr./2024 3 World Bank Unit-1 interest of justice, the matter be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the 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 of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
These assessee’s forty nine appeals are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.