SH. ATUL JAIN,DELHI vs. DCIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE-29, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3201/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

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. The matter was set aside and restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed three appeals against the order of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2017-18 and 2019-20. The appeals arose from proceedings under Section 143(3)/263 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's counsel argued that communication gaps prevented them from presenting all relevant facts.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be restored to the CIT(A) due to communication gaps and non-compliance with procedural requirements, to ensure a fair adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 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

For Appellant: Adv. &
Hearing: 24.09.2025Pronounced: 24.09.2025

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No. 3199/Del/2025
ITA No. 3200/Del/2025
ITA No. 3201/Del/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Sh. Atul Jain, Vs ACIT/JAO/DCIT BN-20, Shalimar Bagh, Central Circle-29, C. R. Delhi-110088 Building, I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AGJPB1648N Assessee by : Sh. Keshav Dwivedi, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Kumar Singh, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 24.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 24.09.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: These assessee’s three appeals in 3200 & 3201/Del/2025 for Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2019-20, arise against the CIT(A)-30, New Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/M/250/2024-25/1074868382(1), 1074868725(1) & 1074868891(1) all dated 22.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(3)/263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), respectively.

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case files perused.

3.

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not 3200 & 3201/Del/2025 Atul Jain appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings and therefore, in the larger interest of justice met in case, the matter be restored back to the CIT(A).

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. 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 all appeals 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 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →