Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “DB” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI
Year: 2016-17 MOHD SHAZAD, INCOME TAX OFFICER, बिधम Selempur, Rajputan, ITO, Ward 1(3)(4), Vs. Roorkee District, HARIDWAR, Roorkee, Uttarakhand. Roorkee, Uttarakhand 247667. PAN No.BKXPS3769N अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by Shri Tarandeep Singh, Advocate Revenue by Shri Akash Barnwal, Sr. DR 08.04.2026 सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date of hearing: 15.04.2026 उद्घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal arises from order dated 28.10.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”) by Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi.
Right at the outset, the Ld. AR pointed out the finding given on page 2 of the impugned order, whereby it is mentioned that three opportunities given for presenting the facts before the Ld. CIT(A) could not be availed off by the assesse. It was prayed that another chance may be given for presenting the facts as the assesse could not do so at the 1 level of Ld. CIT(A) since he is not conversant with taxation laws and was not assisted by any competent tax practitioner.
2.1 The Ld. DR did not have any objection in case the matter was to be remanded back to then file of Ld. CIT(A).
We have carefully considered the submissions of Ld. AR/DR, and have gone through the records. We deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after giving an opportunity of being heard.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15.04.2026