REKHA JAIN,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 2(2), FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6651/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 November 2025AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. This was done to ensure justice, acknowledging potential communication issues with the virtual hearing mechanism.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was filed with a significant delay. The assessee's counsel argued that communication gaps prevented them from presenting all relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be restored to the CIT(A) due to communication gaps and the assessee's inability to present all facts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Gupta, Advocate
Hearing: 26.11.2025Pronounced: 26.11.2025

Assessee by Shri Aditya Gupta, Advocate Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 26.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER 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 & Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250 /2023-24/1055598234(1), dated 12.11.2024 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

2.

Delay of 721 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

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 CIT(A). The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the addition(s) herein on merits.

4.

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 CIT(A) 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 →