Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 arose against an order of the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel submitted that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not appear to present facts before the lower appellate authority.
Held
The Tribunal held that communication gaps at various levels could not be ruled out, and there was no effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, the appeal was set aside and restored back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the lower appellate order is vitiated due to communication gaps and non-compliance with statutory provisions, requiring restoration of the case.
Sections Cited
153C, 143(3), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman
Asstt. Year: 2018-19 Naresh Kumar Sharma, Vs DCIT, 2401, DLF, Phase-IV, Central Circle-27, Gurgaon, Haryana-122001 New Delhi-110055 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ALXPK4565G Assessee by : Sh. Paritosh Jain, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 25.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.09.2025 ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2018-19, arises against the CIT(A)-29, New Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/91/2024-25/1074431758(1) dated 12.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
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
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. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no effective compliance to section 250(6) of the Act in the impugned lower appellate order stipulating points of determination to be framed followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside 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.