RAJESH ,GWALIOR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, GWALIOR
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps due to the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the appeal was set aside and restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2017-18 was heard ex parte as the assessee did not appear. The assessee was allegedly non-cooperative and faced communication gaps during the proceedings.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication due to communication gaps and absence of the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)-NFAC”],Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1063441102(1) dated 27.03.2024, involving proceedings under section 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We, accordingly, proceed ex parte against him.
Learned Sr. DR, Shri Shrivastava submits that the assessee has been non-cooperative all along. He vehemently supports the learned lower authorities’ action in making the addition(s). It emerges from the case records that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in lower appellate proceedings and therefore, in the larger interest of justice, the matter may be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC.
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 appeals 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.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13.02.2025.
More judgments on Section 270A
- Kamleshkumar Somalal Bhatt, Himatnagar vs Income Tax Ofifcer, Ward 1, HimatnagarITA 2130/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Kkg Associates, Visakhapatnam vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(1)…ITA 345/VIZ/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shamsunder Pritesh Malode, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-12(1), HyderabadITA 399/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Rama Naidu Gutha, Anantapur vs ITO, Ward -1, AnantapurITA 1895/HYD/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2023-24
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- Anisha Busa vs. Sibar Institute Of Dental SciencesAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026