KAMLESH,MATHURA vs. ITO, INCOME TAX OFFICE MATHURA

PDF

ITA 325/AGR/2024Status: DisposedITAT Agra13 February 2025AY 2012-13Bench: IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 325/Agra/2024 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kamlesh, B-98, Anand Lok Vs. Income-tax Officer, Colony, Goverdhan Road, Post Ward 1(3)(2), Mathura. Office Krishna Nagar, Mathura. PAN : BIWPK2626M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Varun Sharma, C.A. Department by Sh. Shailendra Shrivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 13.02.2025 Date of 1 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13 arose against the order of the CIT(A)-NFAC, involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that communication gaps at various levels prevented them from presenting all facts, requesting the matter be restored.

Held

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps due to the new virtual hearing mechanism. In the interest of justice, the matter was set aside back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication with three opportunities of hearing.

Key Issues

Whether the matter should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC due to alleged communication gaps during virtual hearings and whether the assessee was prevented from presenting their case adequately.

Sections Cited

147, 144

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

Hearing: 13.02.2025Pronounced: 13.02.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, 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/250/2024-15/1066127863(1) dated 27.06.2024, involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

Learned counsel submits at the outset 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 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 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.