NARAYANI FLATS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHANDNI CHOWK vs. DEPUTY COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 25 DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1467/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 April 2026AY 2019-20202 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps and, in the interest of justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was given three effective opportunities for hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2019-20 was against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee claimed that due to communication gaps, they could not present all facts in the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented from presenting their case effectively before the lower appellate authority due to communication gaps, warranting a remand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 06.04.2026Pronounced: 06.04.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019-20, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29 [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s order dated 05.12.2025, case no. 10840/2018- 19, involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case filed 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, larger interest of justice would be met, in case, the matter may be restored back to the Assessing Officer. The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making 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 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.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →