SARIKA,ROHTAK vs. ITO, WARD -2, ROHTAK, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5042/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 September 2025AY 2013-14Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps and non-compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was set aside and restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 arises from an order by the CIT(A)/NFAC under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's counsel argued that due to communication gaps and issues with the virtual hearing mechanism, the assessee could not present all relevant facts before the lower appellate authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate proceedings were conducted effectively, considering potential communication gaps and compliance with procedural requirements, necessitating a fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 23.09.2025Pronounced: 23.09.2025

Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Sarika, Vs Income Tax Officer, H.No. 1844, Sector-2-3 Part, Ward-2, Rohtak, Haryana-124001 Rohtak, Haryana-124001 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. EOPPS5514N Assessee by: Sh. Nakul Gupta, Adv. Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.09.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077896173(1) dated 27.06.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

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 proceedings and therefore, in the larger interest of justice met in case, the matter be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC.

Sarika 4. Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism 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)/NFAC 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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →