SMT. RENU TYAGI,GURUGRAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(5), GURUGRAM

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

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.