NEHA KAPIL,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD 43(8), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6589/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 November 2025AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps with the new virtual hearing mechanism. It was deemed appropriate to restore the appeal to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 was filed against an order passed under section 144. The assessee contended that due to communication gaps, they could not present all relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented from presenting their case due to communication gaps in the virtual hearing process, warranting a remand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Ayush, CA
Hearing: 26.11.2025Pronounced: 26.11.2025

Date of hearing 26.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER 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 & Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250 /2024-25/1070288827(1), dated 12.11.2024 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2.

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, the matter may be restored back to the Assessing Officer. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the addition(s) herein on merits.

3.

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 restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26th November, 2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →