Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's three appeals arose from assessment orders and a penalty order for AY 2010-11 and AY 2012-13. The lower authorities had proceeded ex-parte against the assessee.
Held
The Tribunal restored the quantum assessment appeals back to the assessing authority, allowing the assessee one more opportunity to plead and prove all relevant facts due to communication gaps. The penalty appeal was dismissed as consequential and a duplicate.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity for assessment due to ex-parte proceedings and communication gaps? Whether the penalty appeal is consequential to the main assessment?
Sections Cited
147, 144, 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal
Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Smt. Renu Tyagi, Vs Income Tax Officer, Tower-G, Flat 001, Bestech Park Ward-3(5), View, Ananda, Sector-81, Gurgaon-122001 Gurgaon-122004 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ASXPK6470H Assessee by : Sh. Anshul Mittal, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 13.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 13.10.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These assessee’s three appeals in 298 & 308/Del/2025 for Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2012-13 arise against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order Nos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070456001(1), 1070458893(1) & 1070457146(1) all dated 19.11.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 and 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.
Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.
2 MA Nos. 296, 298 & 308/Del/2025 Renu Tyagi 3. We advert to the assessee’s twin quantum appeals & 298/Del/2025 wherein the learned lower authorities have proceeded ex-parte against her in assessment(s) as well as in the lower appellate proceedings.
That being the case, learned counsel submits that the assessee could not plead and prove all the relevant facts on account of various communication gaps amongst her auditor or arguing counsel(s) owing to circumstances beyond her control. We are further informed that this tribunal in assessee’s penalty appeal for A.Y. 2010-11 has already restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication.
Faced with this situation and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant twin quantum appeal back to the assessing authority with a rider that possibility of some communication gaps could not be all together ruled out, she deserves one more effective innings. Learned assessing authority is accordingly directed to re-decide both these quantum assessments in the assessee’s case afresh with a rider that she shall plead and prove all relevant facts at 3 MA Nos. 296, 298 & 308/Del/2025 Renu Tyagi her own risk within three effective opportunities in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
These assessee’s twin quantum appeals & 298/Del/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes.
So far as the assessee’s penalty appeal for assessment year 2010-11 is concerned, it has already come on record that same is a consequential one as we have already restored the main case back to the Assessing Officer (supra). Rejected as a “duplicate” one therefore.